Patents and the Expectation of Success Doctrine
What is Reasonable, Tension With Enablement, Best Practices for Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Course Details
- smart_display Format
On-Demand
- signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level
- work Practice Area
Patent
- event Date
Tuesday, January 31, 2023
- schedule Time
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
- timer Program Length
90 minutes
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
This CLE course will provide patent counsel with guidance on the doctrine of expectation of success. The panel will examine how much is reasonably needed and the tension between the doctrine and enablement. The panel will discuss recent cases and will offer best practices for patent drafting and patent prosecution.
Faculty

Mr. Wheelock’s practice includes the preparation and prosecution of patent and trademark applications and drafting intellectual property agreements, including non-compete agreements. He has brought and defended lawsuits in federal and state courts relating to intellectual property and has participated in seizures of counterfeit and infringing goods. Mr. Wheelock prepares and prosecutes U.S. and foreign patent applications for mechanical and electromechanical devices, manufacturing machinery and processes, and metal alloys for clients in the medical device, consumer products, and agrifood tech industries, among others. He also does a substantial amount of patentability searching, trademark availability searching, and patent and trademark infringement studies.

Dr. Pereira, Ph.D., leverages his extensive background in science and law to deliver strategic patent portfolio management, client counseling, and litigation services. Specializing in technologies such as chemical technologies, metallurgy, solar, bioinformatics, semiconductors, OLEDs, solid-state batteries, medical diagnostics, AI and computer-related technologies, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology, he adeptly navigates the complexities of patent prosecution, IP litigation, and patent interferences for his clients. As a partner at Merchant & Gould's Washington D.C. Area office, Dr. Pereira focuses on delivering comprehensive intellectual property services to innovators. He helps them navigate the legal landscape to protect their inventions and maximize the value of their IP assets. Dr. Pereira is adept at handling intellectual property asset acquisitions, offering thorough risk assessment and due diligence to secure his client's future growth and success. He has a strong background in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), district court patent litigations, and appeals at the Federal Circuit. Dr. Pereira's proactive approach to pre-litigation counseling and litigation avoidance is highly valued by clients seeking to navigate the complex landscape of intellectual property law.

Mr. Gosse helps clients protect their intellectual property rights through litigation, working on all phases of litigation matters, ranging from due diligence investigations through trial and post-trial motions. In district court litigation, he has substantial pre-trial and trial experience, including multiple jury trials relating to patent infringement, validity, and breach of license. Mr. Gosse has argued claim construction and motions for summary judgment and has deposed numerous fact and expert witnesses. In addition, he helps clients procure broad IP protection at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, beginning with patent drafting and prosecution and extending to post-issuance reexamination and AIA proceedings as appropriate. He has successfully argued on appeal to the PTAB and has successfully defended patent owners against inter partes review and covered business method petitions at both the preliminary response stage and after institution of trial.Â
Description
Several recent Federal Circuit decisions have addressed the requirement for reasonable expectation of success in the obviousness context. Recent cases discuss the requirement and the degree of predictability required and demonstrate increased emphasis on a showing of obviousness increasingly relies on a showing of reasonable expectation of success.
The Federal Circuit's decision in OSI Pharmaceuticals v. Apotex (Fed. Cir. 2019) highlighted the importance of a reasonable expectation of success in the obviousness analysis. In OSI, the court ruled nonobvious a method of treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that used a known compound, but there was no data on the compound's efficacy with NSCLC.
In Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Actavis L.L.C. (Fed. Cir. 2019), the Federal Circuit held that a prior art reference that discloses a goal but not an explanation of how to reach that goal does not provide a reasonable expectation of success. Moreover, in Allergan Sales L.L.C. v. Sandoz Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2019), the Federal Circuit explained that a showing of expectation of success must be met for functional aspects of a claimed invention as well.
Nor is the reasonable expectation of success limited to chem/bio technologies, in University of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vue Lighting (Fed. Cir. 2021), the Federal Circuit emphasized that a reasonable expectation of success requires more than the mere possibility of the claimed result. The court relied on studies that had shown the likely impossibility of the claimed result. These studies, which predated the cited references, showed that blue light would not inactivate antibiotic-resistant bacteria without a photosensitizing chemical, as claimed.
Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys discusses recent Federal Circuit cases and potential implications of these cases. The panel will also examine the relationship between the requirement for a reasonable expectation of success and enablement. The panel will offer best practices for patent drafting and patent prosecution in light of recent case law.
Outline
- History of the requirement for a reasonable expectation of success
- The requirement for a reasonable expectation of success and enablement
- Best practices for patent drafting
- Best practices for patent prosecution
Benefits
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- Under what circumstances should the reasonable expectation of success be argued during prosecution at the PTAB? During litigation?
- What evidence is necessary to support a reasonable expectation of success argument?
- How can patents be drafted to establish that the disclosure enables the claimed subject matter but that skilled persons would not have had a reasonable expectation of success based on the prior art?
Unlimited access to premium CLE courses:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for attorneys and legal professionals
Unlimited access to premium CPE courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for CPAs and tax professionals
Unlimited access to premium CLE, CPE, Professional Skills and Practice-Ready courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for legal, accounting, and tax professionals
Related Courses

Patent Design Arounds for Both Utility and Design Patents: Minimizing Risk of Infringement, Reducing Likelihood of Competitor Design Arounds, and Maximizing the Chances of Covering Competitors’ Attempted Design Arounds When Preparing a Patent Application
Monday, May 19, 2025
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

Means-Plus-Function Patent Claims Following Xencor: Preamble, Written Description, and More
Thursday, May 15, 2025
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

Patent Infringement: Structuring Opinions of Counsel
Wednesday, May 7, 2025
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT