United States: A Chemical Markush Claim Tests The Elasticity Of "Consisting Of"

Why are chemical patent claims so difficult to understand? This was the question posed during a 1961 presentation before the Division of Chemical Literature for the American Chemical Society. According to the author, "[A]ttention has been called to the 'sometimes baffling' and seemingly 'absurd' idiom in which are cast chemical patent claims."1 At least some of the blame for the confusion was attributed by the author to the "so-called 'Markush' claim."2 Thus, the author wisely advised, "[A]n understanding of the philosophy behind the Markush expression in chemical claims might help to understand better the meaning of chemical claims themselves."3 More than fifty years later, and at a time where subject matter eligibility, written description, and definiteness issues are at the forefront of the patent prosecution sphere, the Federal Circuit's decision in Multilayer Stretch Cling Film Holdings, Inc. v. Berry Plastics Corp., Nos. 2015-1420, -1477 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 4, 2016), revisits the Markush claims and offers guidance on their proper use.

In Ex parte Markush, 1925 C.D. 126 (Comm'r Pat. 1924), the Commissioner of Patents held that "where no generic expression exists by which a group of alternative elements can be claimed applicants are permitted to recite the elements in the alternative." Thus, "[a] Markush claim is a particular kind of patent claim that lists alternative species or elements that can be selected as part of the claimed invention." Multilayer Stretch, slip op. at 10. Although the concept can be extended to various technologies, traditionally, Markush claims have been more prevalent in the chemical arts, where a Markush claim often recites the presence of a specific substituent selected from a recited group of chemicals.

No precise linguistic formula is required to create a Markush claim. See, e.g., id. The guidelines for patent examination are instructive on this point, providing that the '[a]lternative expressions are permitted' so long as the claim 'recites a list of alternatively useable species' with no 'uncertainty or ambiguity with respect to the question of scope or clarity of the claims.' Id. (alteration in original) (quoting MPEP § 2173.05(h)). The Federal Circuit has also explained that "[a] Markush group, incorporated in a claim, should be 'closed,' i.e. it must be characterized with the transition phrase 'consisting of,' rather than 'comprising' or 'including.'" Abbott Labs. v. Baxter Pharm. Prods., Inc., 334 F.3d 1274, 1280-81 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (alteration in original) (citation omitted)). In Multilayer Stretch, the Federal Circuit addressed the proper scope of Markush claims by looking at two different ways in which the term "consisting of" was used in the claims at issue.

At issue in the case were patent claims directed to multilayered thermoplastic stretch wrap films. In particular, the Federal Circuit was asked to weigh in on the proper construction of clause (b) of independent claim 1 and similarly worded independent claim 28. Claim 1 is representative:          
"(b) five identifiable inner layers, with each layer being selected from the group consisting of linear low density polyethylene [LLDPE], very low density polyethylene [VLDPE], ultra low density polyethylene [ULDPE], and metallocene-catalyzed linear low density polyethylene [mLDPPE] resins; said resins are homopolymers, copolymers, or terpolymers, of ethylene and C3 to C20 alpha-olefins...."
Dependent claim 10, which recites, in relevant part, "[t]he multi-layer, thermoplastic stretch wrap film of claim 1, where at least one said inner layer comprises low density polyethylene homopolymers [LDPE]," was also addressed.  

Element (b) essentially creates a Markush group that lists four species or types of resin—LLDPE, VLDPE, ULDPE, and mLLDPE—understood to be alternately useable as "inner layers" of the claimed film. The district court construed the claim to require that each of the five layers of the film be composed of only one of the four listed resins (i.e., excluding layers made of blends of the recited resins). Id. at 2. Following this construction, the district court granted summary judgment of noninfringement, as at least one inner layer of the accused films contained blends of resins from the class of mLLDPE, ULDPE, and LLDPE, a fact that both parties agreed on.  See id. at 8. The district court further invalidated claim 1, finding that it was closed to resins other than the ones explicitly recited in the Markush group. In addressing the issue of claim construction, the Federal Circuit dealt with two issues: (1) whether the Markush group of element (b) is closed to resins other than the listed four, and (2) whether the Markush group is closed to blends of the four listed resins. Id. at 11. In short, the Federal Circuit answered "yes" to the first question (over the dissent of Judge Taranto) and "no" to the second question.

On the first issue, the Federal Circuit reiterated that the use of the transitional phrase "consisting of" to set off a patent claim element creates a very strong presumption that the claim element is "closed" and therefore "exclude[s] any elements, steps, or ingredients not specified in the claim." Id. at 12 (alteration in original) (quoting AFG Indus., Inc. v. Cardinal IG Co., 239 F.3d 1239, 1245 (Fed. Cir. 2001)).. "'[I]t is not inconceivable that a patentee could break with conventional claim construction and become his own lexicographer,' so as to give [the term] 'consisting of' an alternative, less restrictive meaning." Id. (quoting Conoco, Inc., v. Energy & Envtl. Int'l, L.C., 460 F.3d 1349, 1359 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2006). "But to overcome the exceptionally strong presumption that a claim term set off with 'consisting of' is closed to unrecited elements, the specification and prosecution history must unmistakably manifest an alternative meaning." Id.  

Multilayer argued that this alternative meaning was communicated in the patent. But rather than arguing that the specification of the patent indeed had an unmistakable intent to open element (b) to any unrecited resin, Multilayer's argument was more focused. In particular, Multilayer argued that the claimed inner layers should be open to one resin specifically claimed in its dependent claims (i.e., low density polyethylene (LDPE)). Id. at 14-15. A closed interpretation of claim 1, Multilayer argued, would be improper as the Court should "strive[ ] to reach a claim construction that does not render claim language in dependent claims meaningless." Id. at 16 (alteration in original) (quoting Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc. v. Mylan Labs., Inc., 520 F.3d 1358, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2008)). The court rejected Multilayer's position, noting that while dependent claims can provide guidance in the proper interpretation of the scope of an independent claim, "[t]he dependent claim tail cannot wag the independent claim dog." Id. (quoting N. Am. Vaccine, Inc. v. Am. Cyanamid Co., 7 F.3d 1571, 1577 (Fed. Cir. 1993)).

Consistently, the court found that the specification did not provide "a clear intent to open the Markush group of element (b) to LDPE or to any other resin not expressly listed in the claim." Id. at 15. With this finding, the dependent claims that claim inner films with resins other than those four recited in claim 1, including LDPE, also were held invalid.

Dissenting, Judge Taranto focused on the fact that the language in the claim was not a classic Markush claim, as the term preceding the listing was not representative of the generic type of elements recited within the group. In particular, Judge Taranto argued that a "layer" is an open-ended physical structure that does not "have to be one or more of the listed species" of resins. Taranto Dissent at 4. If the claim had said "layer consisting of" one or more of the listed resins, Judge Taranto explained, the meaning would have been plain, as it would have conveyed that the layer must be made out of only the listed resins, and not others. Id. at 2-3. However, the language actually used in the claims is a step removed. In element (b), "consisting of" does not follow and directly modify "layer"; it follows and directly modifies "group." Id. at 2. Thus, the phrase characterizes the relationship between "group" and the listed resins: the latter are all the members of the former. Id. It does not characterize the (closed or open) relationship between "layer" and what materials can be ingredients of the layer. Id. The claim phrase naming that relationship is "selected from," not "consisting of." Id. at 2-3. The established meaning of "consisting of" therefore does not determine the meaning of the claim language here. 
at 3.

On the second question, i.e., whether limitation (b) of claims 1 and 28 is closed to blends of LLDPE, VLDPE, ULDPE, and mLLDPE, the Federal Circuit agreed with Multilayer that the Markush group of element (b) must be construed to permit blends of the four recited resins. Multilayer Stretch, slip op at 21-22 (majority opinion).  Drawing a distinction with the use of "consisting of" discussed in the first question, the Federal Circuit noted that the use of the transitional phrase "consisting of," by itself, does not necessarily suggest that a Markush group is closed to mixtures, combinations, or blends. Id. at 22. Nonetheless, there is a presumption that a Markush group is closed to mixtures of the listed elements. Id. (citing Abbott, 334 F.3d at 1281). If a patentee desires mixtures or combinations of the members of the Markush group, the patentee would need to add qualifying language while drafting the claim. Id. Here, there is no express language in element (b) permitting "mixtures," "combinations," or "blends" of the four recited resins; thus, under Abbott, the Markush group of element (b) is therefore presumed closed to blends. Id. at 22-23. The question is whether that presumption can be overcome by a combination of other claim language and the specification itself. Id. at 23.

On this point, the Federal Circuit found that Multilayer had rebutted the presumption of excluding blends of the resins. The intrinsic evidence of the patent, in the claims and the specification, is unequivocal that the inner layers described in element (b) are open, not closed, to blends of the recited resins. Id.The claims themselves recite a metallocene-catalyzed linear low density polyethylene (mLLDPE), which is itself a subtype of LLDPE with a particular kind of catalyst. Id. at 24. Similarly, the specification supports construing element (b) as open to blends, as it repeatedly and consistently references blends in describing any and all resins, including the four resins of element (b). Id. Similarly, the specification "repeatedly and consistently references blends in describing any and all resins, including the four resins of element (b)," and discusses blending the resins in order "to achieve a desired range of physical or mechanical properties." Id. at 25 (citation omitted). Finding "nothing in the prosecution history to suggest that blends are excluded," the Federal Circuit found "this strong intrinsic evidence" requires "the Markush group be read as open to blends of the four listed resins." Id.

While Markush claims can give the patent applicant some freedom to ensure full coverage of the scope of the invention, this does not negate the right of the public to know the boundaries of the claim. This Federal Circuit decision provides some useful pointers on how to do so. First, carefully choose the "generic" group for which the Markush group is offering alternatives. As noted by Judge Taranto, Markush group language typically recites "an X [being] selected from a group consisting of A, B, and C," where A, B, and C are actually instances of X. Taranto Dissent at 3 (alteration in original). That is, the term X is a genus or generic descriptor. Id. In this case, instead of "each layer being selected from the group consisting of," the claim could have been more clear and recite "each layer being made of a resin selected from the group consisting of." Second, if mixtures or blends are within the scope of the claim, be sure to say so. As noted by the court, the presumption is that the Markush group is closed to blends and mixtures. Lastly, avoid being the applicant that "sometimes mistakenly write[s] dependent claims that invalidly add elements inconsistent with their independent claims." Id. at 7. Be mindful to draft your dependent claims, ensuring that they are narrower than the precedent claims, and confirm that this remains consistent, even if the scope of the independent claims is narrowed during prosecution.


1 Edward H. Valance, Understanding the Markush claim in Chemical Patents, 1 J. Chem. Doc. 87, 87 (July 1961), http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/c160002a022?journalCode=jci001.

2 Id..

3 Id.

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
10 Nov 2016, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

As part of Strafford Publications’ webinar series, Finnegan partner Beth Ferrill will provide guidance to patent counsel on navigating the inter partes review process for challenging design patents.

17 Nov 2016, Seminar, San Antonio, United States

The Patent Resources Group provides advanced patent law courses for established patent practitioners. Finnegan attorneys Stephen Kabakoff, Brian Kacedon, and William Pratt will lecture on “Drafting Patent License Agreements.” Jam

23 Nov 2016, Seminar, Vancouver, Canada

Finnegan is a Gold sponsor of the Licensing Executives Society USA and Canada Annual Meeting. Additionally, Finnegan partnerDori Hines was invited to moderate the panel discussion “From Component to Electronic Product: IP Challenges Along the Supply Chain.”

In association with
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
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.