In a recent claim construction order, Judge Richard G. Andrews found preamble language limiting because it provided meaning to terms in two claims and antecedent basis for another claim term. Sanofi v. Lupin Atlantis Holdings S.A., C.A. No. 15-415-RGA (D. Del. Oct. 3, 2016). The preamble language at issue was, for claims 1 and 6, “a method of reducing a risk of cardiovascular hospitalization in a patient” and, for claim 9, “a method of reducing a risk of hospitalization for atrial fibrillation in a patient.” The Court found that the preamble language for claims 1 and 6 gave meaning to the claim term “effective amount” because reading the body of claims 1 and 6 (“administering to said patient an effective amount of dronedrone or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof…”) on its own, without the preamble language, “begs the question, effective for what?” Id. at 6. With respect to claim 9, the Court found that the preamble language provided an antecedent basis for the claim term “patient in need of reduction of said risk.” Id. at 7. The Court explained that “[w]ithout the phrase ‘reducing a risk of cardiovascular hospitalization,’ the phrase ‘a patient in need of reduction of said risk’ would not have a proper antecedent basis.” Id. at 8.