It's comparatively preferrable.
C. Lynwood Smith, Jr 12. United States District Judge. Abbott Point of Care, Inc. v. Epocal, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196881, 2012 WL 12897958 (United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern DivisionJanuary 18, 2012, Filed). https://advance-lexis-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:5NK0-7TH1-F04C-P10W-00000-00&context=1516831.
This court adopted Somewhat relatedly, the Special Master recommended that the phrases "positioned in a conduit" and "positioned in said conduit" be construed to mean "positioned in a channel for conveying fluids," and "positioned in said channel for conveying fluids," respectively.105Link to the text of the note The Special Master reasoned that the word "in" must mean "wholly within" the conduit. The court rejected the Special Master's [*71] recommended construction because it excluded all of the illustrated embodiments depicted in the '824 patent, and because the ordinary meaning of the word "in" does not require that something be completely inside something else.106Link to the text of the note The court construed the terms "positioned in a conduit" and "positioned in said conduit" as meaning
a gas equilibration reservoir positioned with respect to the conduit so as to allow contact between at least some portion of the reservoir (or with the reservoir's gas-permeable membrane, if one is employed) and at least some portion of the aqueous calibrant fluid within the conduit, such that there can be contact between the fluid in the conduit and the equilibration reservoir to allow for gas exchange to occur when the fluid is brought into contact with or exposed to the reservoir.107Link to the text of the note