Patent: 10,493,094

Summary for Patent: 10,493,094

Title:	Advanced functional biocompatible polymer putty used as a hemostatic agent for treating damaged tissue and cells
Abstract:	A hemostatic putty for treatment of a variety of wounds topographies, including but not limited to highly three dimensional wounds, for example gunshot wounds and impalements, is disclosed. The putty is comprised of a matrix polymer weakly crosslinked or not crosslinked such that a viscoelastic matrix is formed. The viscoelastic nature of the putty is tunable by the composition and enables the putty to conform to a variety of wound topographies. Likewise, a hemostatic polymer, for example chitosan or hydrophobically modified chitosan, is included in this matrix to impart hemostatic properties and tissue adhesive on the putty. The hemostatic polymers disclosed prevent microbial infection and are suitable for oxygen transfer required during normal wound metabolism.
Inventor(s):	Diehn; Kevin (Towson, MD), Dowling; Matthew (College Park, MD), Raghavan; Srinivasa R. (Silver Spring, MD), King; David R. (Boston, MA)
Assignee:	GEL-E, Inc. (College Park, MD) University of Maryland, College Park (College Park, MD) The General Hospital Corporation (Boston, MA)
Application Number:	15/443,062
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

Understanding the Scope and Claims of United States Patent 10,493,094: A Detailed Analysis

Introduction

When analyzing a patent, particularly one like United States Patent 10,493,094, it is crucial to delve into its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape. This analysis will help in understanding the patent's validity, its position within the industry, and potential legal implications.

Patent Overview

To begin, it is essential to understand the basic details of the patent in question. However, since the specific details of U.S. Patent 10,493,094 are not provided in the sources, we will focus on general principles and recent developments in patent law that could impact its analysis.

Patent Claims

Independent and Dependent Claims

Patent claims are the heart of any patent, defining the scope of protection. Independent claims stand alone and define the invention, while dependent claims refer back to and further limit the independent claims[3].

• Independent Claim Length and Count: Research has shown that the length and count of independent claims can be metrics for measuring patent scope. Narrower claims, as indicated by shorter lengths and fewer counts, are often associated with a higher probability of grant and a shorter examination process[3].

Claim Language and Scope

The language used in patent claims is critical. Clear and specific language helps in defining the invention and avoiding ambiguity, which can lead to disputes over patent validity.

Patent Scope and Validity

Measuring Patent Scope

Patent scope is a vital aspect of patent quality debates. Metrics such as independent claim length and count can provide insights into the breadth of the patent. Broader claims can lead to increased licensing and litigation costs, potentially diminishing innovation incentives[3].

Recent Developments in Design Patent Obviousness

The Federal Circuit's recent decision to overrule the Rosen-Durling test for design patent obviousness is significant. This change adopts a more flexible approach, aligning with the Graham factors used for utility patents. The new framework assesses obviousness based on the scope and content of prior art, without the rigid requirement that the primary reference must be "basically the same" as the claimed design[1][4].

Obviousness and Prior Art

The Graham Factors

The Graham factors, now applied to design patents, consider:

• The scope and content of the prior art.
• The differences between the prior art and the claimed invention.
• The level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
• Secondary considerations such as long-felt but unsolved needs and failure of others[1][4].

Analogous Art Requirement

The new approach emphasizes that prior art need not be identical but must be analogous to the claimed design. This flexibility allows fact-finders to use common sense and consider a broader range of prior art, preventing undue confusion while ensuring that obvious designs are not patented[1][4].

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Proceedings

Inter Partes Review (IPR)

IPR proceedings, such as those seen in the Voice Tech Corp. case, can significantly impact the validity of a patent. The PTAB's decisions, which can be appealed to the Federal Circuit, play a crucial role in determining whether a patent's claims are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103[2].

Industry and Legal Implications

Impact on Patent Litigation

Changes in the legal framework, such as the overruling of the Rosen-Durling test, can have far-reaching implications for patent litigation. Patents that were previously considered valid under the old test may now face challenges, and new patents must be evaluated under the more flexible Graham approach[1][4].

Disclosure of Prior Art

The importance of disclosing prior art references during patent prosecution is highlighted by cases like Liquidia Corporation vs. United Therapeutics. Failure to disclose relevant prior art can lead to claims of invalidity and unenforceability[5].

Key Takeaways

• Patent Claims: Clear and specific claim language is crucial for defining the invention and avoiding disputes.
• Patent Scope: Metrics like independent claim length and count can help measure patent scope and predict the likelihood of grant.
• Obviousness: The Graham factors now apply to design patents, allowing for a more flexible assessment of obviousness.
• Prior Art: Analogous art, rather than identical art, is considered in evaluating obviousness.
• PTAB Proceedings: IPR proceedings can significantly impact patent validity and are subject to appeal.

FAQs

1. What is the significance of the Graham factors in design patent obviousness? The Graham factors, now applied to design patents, consider the scope and content of prior art, differences between prior art and the claimed design, the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and secondary considerations. This approach provides a more flexible and common-sense-based evaluation of obviousness[1][4].

2. How does the overruling of the Rosen-Durling test affect design patent litigation? The overruling of the Rosen-Durling test introduces a more flexible approach to assessing obviousness, which can lead to re-evaluation of previously valid patents and changes in litigation strategies[1][4].

3. What are the implications of failing to disclose prior art during patent prosecution? Failure to disclose relevant prior art can lead to claims of invalidity and unenforceability of the patent, as seen in cases like Liquidia Corporation vs. United Therapeutics[5].

4. How do independent claim length and count affect patent scope and grant probability? Narrower claims, indicated by shorter lengths and fewer counts, are associated with a higher probability of grant and a shorter examination process[3].

5. What role does the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) play in determining patent validity? The PTAB plays a crucial role in determining patent validity through IPR proceedings, and its decisions can be appealed to the Federal Circuit[2].

Sources

1. Federal Circuit Overrules Long-Standing Test for Assessing Design Patent Non-Obviousness, Adopts More Flexible Approach - Pearl Cohen[1]
2. VOICE TECH CORP. v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC - CAFC[2]
3. Patent Claims and Patent Scope - SSRN[3]
4. Federal Circuit Overrules Rosen-Durling Test for Design Patent Obviousness; USPTO Follows Quickly with Guidance - Akin Gump[4]
5. Liquidia Corporation Files Response to United Therapeutics Lawsuit - Liquidia Corporation[5]

Details for Patent 10,493,094

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Omrix Biopharmaceuticals Ltd	EVITHROM	thrombin, topical (human)	Solution	125247	August 27, 2007	10,493,094	2033-03-13
Omrix Biopharmaceuticals Ltd	EVITHROM	thrombin, topical (human)	For Injection	125247	September 17, 2009	10,493,094	2033-03-13