With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". its interpretation involves question of fact, precluding summary disposition.”); Seaco Ins. Co. v. Barbosa, 435 Mass. 772, 761 N.E.2d 946, 951 (2002) (reversing summary judgment, noting that when a contract has terms that “are ambiguous, uncertain or equivocal in meaning, the intent of the parties is a question of fact to be determined at trial”); Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Boston Edison Co., 412 Mass. 545, 591 N.E.2d 165, 172 (1992) (interpretation of ambiguous contract is question of fact for the jury); Weingart v. Allen & O’Hara, Inc., 654 F.2d 1096, 1104 (5th Cir.1981) (applying Florida law) (reversing JNOV on ground that scope of release in settlement agreement was ambiguous and subject to resolution by trier of fact); Hoffman v. Terry, 397 So.2d 1184, 1184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (<HOLDING>); Hurt v. Leatherby Ins. Co., 380 So.2d 432,

A: holding that the disputed issue with respect to the state law bar was properly submitted to the jury
B: holding that claim construction is an issue of law for the court not a question of fact for the jury
C: holding the denial of a motion for summary judgment on an issue which is later submitted to the jury is not reviewable
D: holding that when agreement is reasonably susceptible to more than one construction issue is properly submitted to jury for resolution as a matter of fact
D.