Seems to be neither: Indeed, the written description of the patents in question expressly refuted the claim construction of the patentee-plaintiff. As a result

Seems to be neither: Indeed, the written description of the patents in question expressly refuted the claim construction of the patentee-plaintiff. As a result, the district court properly found that EonNet pursued objectively baseless infringement claims. If this set a precedent it wouldn't be against vague patents, or against suing implementations of the obvious, etc.