Was apatentlawyer merely paraphrasing Townsend?:

The Vitronics court held that so-called "intrinsic" evidence from the patent documents themselves is favored, such as the plain meaning of claim language as well as the definitions derived from the patent specification and file history. By contrast so-called "extrinsic" evidence is disfavored in patent claim construction, thereby severely limiting use of evidence such as inventor and expert testimony, as well as the use of technical dictionaries or other reference materials. This type of "extrinsic" evidence may only be allowed in situations where inherent ambiguities exist from the "intrinsic" evidence.

http://www.townsend.com/resource/publication.asp?o=4350

Be well