United States: Two Recent Obviousness Cases Highlight Result-Oriented Claim Language

Obtaining a patent for an improved composition or method of use of known materials can bring substantial rewards. For example, this type of patent can provide leverage in licensing negotiations with the owner of an early, broad, blocking patent. It can also make the difference as to whether a pharmaceutical innovator's drug will become exposed to generic competition as soon as the original patent on the drug molecule expires, regardless of inventive work that continued beyond the original filing. Prosecuting and defending such patents can be difficult, however. Two Federal Circuit opinions highlight the role that result-oriented claim language can play in defeating an obviousness challenge. Innovators might consider including such language in their patent claims, either as a primary or a backup strategy.

Reducing the number of daily doses of a medicine without loss of efficacy may sound like something one would prove as an unexpected result, rather than include explicitly in a claim. But in one recent case, this result-oriented limitation did appear in a claim, and it likely saved the day for the patentee. See Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., 726 F.3d 1286, 1289 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Allergan court considered obviousness challenges to both a method claim explicitly reciting the effective, reduced dosing—twice a day instead of three times a day—and a claim to the composition used in the method that did not have result-oriented language. Id. The medicine at issue treats glaucoma or high eye pressure and comprises 0.2 percent brimonidine and 0.5 percent timolol. Id. The method claim survived the obviousness challenge, but the composition claim did not. Id. at 1295.

The reasoning underlying these divergent outcomes in Allergan shows the importance of the result-oriented claim language. The prior art taught administering 0.2 percent brimonidine and 0.5 percent timolol five minutes apart, and that achieving better patient compliance would have motivated one to combine brimonidine and timolol into a single formulation. Id. at 1293. Reversing the trial court regarding the composition claim, the Federal Circuit found that the evidence of obviousness outweighed secondary considerations—including unexpected efficacy. Id.

Turning to the method claim, the court did not explicitly weigh secondary considerations against the evidence of obviousness. Instead, it noted that the method "contains the additional limitation that the daily number of doses of brimonidine be reduced from 3 to 2 times a day without loss of efficacy," id. at 1293, and reasoned that "while it is true that the prior art shows concomitant administration of brimonidine and timolol . . . twice per day, this art does not show that there was no loss of efficacy associated with that treatment . . . ," id. at 1294 (emphasis added). Loss of efficacy had been observed with brimonidine when given alone twice a day. Id. Thus, the claim survived because it recited a result—efficacy from a twice-daily administration no less than from a three-times-daily administration—unexpected in light of the prior art, even though twice-daily administration was not new and the composition used in the claimed method had been held obvious.

Since the result was an explicit limitation of the method claim, the result had to be proven obvious by clear and convincing evidence as an essential element of the challenger's prima facie case. In contrast, if the result had not been recited in the claim, the patentee would have had to prove it as a secondary consideration and it would have needed to outweigh the challenger's 35 U.S.C. § 103 case—evidently a strong one given the composition claim's demise. Thus, in a validity contest, it can be an advantage to the patentee having a result limitation in a method claim. In prosecution, result-oriented claim language might keep the burden of production on the examiner and avoid possible downsides of showing unexpected results, such as costs, delays, and risks that may be associated with using declaration evidence to rebut an obviousness rejection. Of course, in cases where claims without result-oriented language are patentable, such claims may be preferable since the result need not be shown to prove infringement. And including method-of-use claims both with and without a result limitation might be a good general strategy, as it provides the patent holder with more flexible enforcement options.

Another recent case, when read with Allergan, further highlights the potential importance of result-oriented language. The Federal Circuit held obvious a claim to an anti-acne pharmaceutical composition comprising certain inactive ingredients and 0.3 percent adapalene as the sole active ingredient. Galderma Labs., L.P. v. Tolmar, Inc., __ F.3d __, 108 U.S.P.Q.2d 1929, No. 13-1034 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 11, 2013). The prior art taught acne medications containing adapalene from 0.01 percent to 1 percent, and the obviousness of the inactive ingredients was undisputed. 108 U.S.P.Q.2d at 1931-32. The key difference between the prior art and the patentee's claimed composition, therefore, was selection of the specific 0.3 percent adapalene concentration. The patentee prevailed at trial based in part on evidence that 0.1 percent was considered the optimum adapalene concentration, and although one would have expected a "clinically significant increase in side effects" from using a higher concentration, the claimed 0.3 percent composition unexpectedly provided comparable tolerability to the 0.1 percent composition. Id. at 1933-34.

The Federal Circuit reversed, holding that the tolerability "does not constitute an unexpected result that is probative of non-obviousness," despite agreeing with the district court that it was unexpected. Id. at 1934. The panel majority explained that unexpected results "probative of non-obviousness . . . differ[] in kind and not merely in degree," and that results "which differ by percentages are differences in degree . . . , where the modification . . . is within" ordinary skill. Id. (emphasis added) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Here, "skilled artisans were capable" of making the necessary modification, and "the expected result was an increase, by some percentage, in the prevalence of certain side effects. The failure of that percent increase to materialize, though unexpected, constitutes only a difference in degree from the prior art results." Id. (emphases added). In other words, the majority found that, in this case, a change in a parameter that turns out to be lower than expected was not sufficient for a legal showing of unexpected results, and had no effect against the evidence of obviousness. The claim was held obvious—despite its novelty and the ability of the claimed composition to provide a likely nonobvious result, judging from the court's acknowledgement that it was factually unexpected.

In dissent, Judge Newman sharply criticized the majority for "applying flawed procedural and substantive law" and "rely[ing] on their own factual determinations and creative theories of law [to] eradicate the patent." Id. at 1935 (Newman, J., dissenting). Judge Newman further stated that "refusing to credit any of the demonstrated 'secondary considerations'" would "foreclose patentability to a vast body of improvement patents." Id. at 1936. Despite these criticisms, innovators should prepare to live with the Galderma precedent unless and until it is either overruled or limited in future cases to its particular facts.

It seems prudent for innovators seeking to patent an improvement to follow the lesson of Allergan about the potential benefits of result-oriented language, either using independent or dependent claims. That is, where a composition or method can provide a result that is unexpected, that result should appear explicitly in one or more claims—it may be easier to win on validity since the challenger needs to prove its obviousness. This consideration may have particular relevance with a result potentially vulnerable to a "degree, not kind" challenge (see Galderma) that prevents the result from acting as a secondary consideration at all. Additionally, a reissue application to add or amend claims may be worth considering for some issued patents with no pending child application, e.g., if unexpected results were relied upon in prosecution or all claims may be vulnerable to a Galderma challenge. In conclusion, including result-oriented language in a claim can be advantageous because an examiner or challenger would have to prove obviousness for the claim as a whole, including the result—and the result may increase the burden of proof substantially.

This article previously appeared in Full Disclosure Patent Prosecution Update, January 2014.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
23 Oct 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

How do trademark and advertising trends impact your company? Join a discussion on the latest trends in the food and beverage industry in the United States and Europe.

24 Oct 2018, Other, Washington, DC, United States

Join the usual suspects from Finnegan as they take you through a detailed discussion of patent prosecution strategies from drafting to grant.

25 Oct 2018, Seminar, Melbourne, Australia

Finnegan is a Gold sponsor of IAM Magazine’s IPBC Australasia. The program will take place at the Sofitel Hotel in Melbourne, Australia.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions