直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

An Issued Life Science MPF U.S. Patent Claim: Ex Parte Gleave

Fall 2018

AIPLA Chemical Practice Chronicles Newsletter

By Thomas Lee Irving; Stacy D. Lewis*

Ex parte Gleave is a landmark decision to the extent PTAB approved a pharmaceutical composition claim under 35 USC §112(f), otherwise known as means-plus-function (MPF) claims.

35 USC §112(f) reads “an element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.”

Section 112(f) provides a tool for patent applicants to, in a controlled way, literally cover equivalents by providing for literal infringement by structure, material, or acts that perform the same function. Historically MPF claims have been used in the mechanical and electrical/ computer fields. According to P.J. Federico’s 1952 commentary on the then-brand new 1952 Patent Act, life science MPF claims were contemplated from the birth of the statutory provision:

The last paragraph of section 112 relating to so-called functional claims is new. It provides that an element of a claim for a combination (and a combination may be not only a combination of mechanical elements, but also a combination of substances in a composition claim, or steps in a process claim) may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function, without the recital of structure, material or acts in support thereof.

For patent drafters practicing in the U.S. life sciences, the means-plus-function claim format may provide more accuracy and clarity than purely structural characterization and may end up providing broader scope. This alternative claim format is worth considering.

Click here to read the full article.

 

*Stacy Lewis is a law clerk at Finnegan

Tags

means-plus-function claim, pharma patent strategy

Downloadable Files

  • PUBLISHED - TLI SDL - AIPLA Chemical Practice Chronicles Newslet

Related Practices

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

Prosecution and Portfolio Management

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Pharmaceutical

Related Offices

Washington, DC

*Stacy Lewis is a Law Clerk at Finnegan

Related Insights

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Conference

31st Annual UMass Chan Research Retreat

October 14-15, 2026

Worcester

Lecture

Resolving Patent Suits Without Settlement Payments

September 3, 2026

Virtual

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Webinar

U.S. Patent Case Law Update 2026

July 23, 2026

Webinar

Conference

2026 China Pharmaceutical Innovation Conference

July 22-24, 2026

Shanghai

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP