Patent: 10,556,894

Summary for Patent: 10,556,894

Title:	Anti-HCMV compositions and methods
Abstract:	Novel compounds useful for treating and/or preventing HCMV infections are provided.
Inventor(s):	Remiszewski; Stacy (Doylestown, PA), Koyuncu; Emre (Doylestown, PA), Sun; Qun (Princeton, PA), Chiang; Lillian (Princeton, NJ)
Assignee:	Evrys Bio, LLC (Doylestown, PA)
Application Number:	15/525,504
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

Analyzing the Claims and Patent Landscape of United States Patent 10,556,894

Introduction

Patent 10,556,894, though not specifically detailed in the provided sources, can be analyzed within the broader context of the U.S. patent landscape. This analysis will delve into the key factors influencing patent claims, the current state of patent litigation, and the evolving nature of the patent system.

The Increasing Complexity of Patent Claims

The number of patent applications and the complexity of patent claims have been on the rise. From 1963 to 1983, the USPTO received approximately 100,000 patent applications per year, but by 2001, this number had surged to 326,508[2].

Impact of Legal Precedents

The case of Festo Corporation v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd. has significantly influenced the interpretation of patent claims. Narrowing amendments to claims elements during the patent application process can limit the scope of patent claims, invoking prosecution history estoppel and eliminating the doctrine of equivalents. This has led to an increase in the number of claims filed with each application, with some applications including thousands of claims[2].

Patent Litigation Trends

Patent litigation has seen significant fluctuations and changes in recent years.

Increase in Patent Infringement Lawsuits

From 2000 to 2010, the number of patent infringement lawsuits in federal courts remained relatively stable, but from 2010 to 2011, there was a notable increase of about a third. This surge was partly due to the anticipation of changes in the 2011 Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), which limited the number of defendants in a single lawsuit, leading to more lawsuits being filed[1].

Role of Nonpracticing Entities (NPEs)

Nonpracticing entities, which do not manufacture products but own and assert patents, have been a significant factor in patent litigation. NPEs brought about a fifth of all patent infringement lawsuits between 2007 and 2011. The AIA mandated a study on the consequences of patent litigation by NPEs, highlighting their impact on the patent landscape[1].

Judicial and Administrative Developments

The judicial and administrative systems have implemented various mechanisms to address patent disputes.

Inter Partes Review (IPR)

The Supreme Court has considered the constitutionality of IPR, a process that allows the USPTO to reconsider its own decisions on patent grants. IPR is viewed as an "error correction mechanism" rather than a substitute for court litigation. It aims to increase the accuracy of patent grants by allowing third-party challenges to existing patents[3].

USPTO's Role in Patent Quality

The USPTO has been working to improve patent quality by analyzing trends in patent infringement litigation and linking this information to internal data on patent examination. This approach is intended to enhance the quality of issued patents and the patent examination process itself[1].

Economic and Technological Impact

The value and economic impact of patents are significant and multifaceted.

Patent Values and Renewal Choices

Research by the USPTO's Office of the Chief Economist has shown that the timing of patent forward citations explains a significant portion of the variation in patent values. Technologies with higher average revenue flows at grant time tend to experience faster depreciation of patent values, indicating a higher intensity of creative destruction[4].

Technological Innovation

Technology innovation drives the need for patent protection, attracting capital for development and commercialization. Advances in technology, such as word processing and remote electronic database searching, have facilitated the patent application process, contributing to the increasing number of patent applications[2].

Data and Research in Patent Litigation

Comprehensive datasets are crucial for understanding patent litigation trends.

Patent Litigation Docket Report Data

The USPTO's Patent Litigation Docket Report Data provides detailed information on nearly 97,000 unique district court cases filed through 2020. This data includes information on litigating parties, attorneys, cause of action, court location, and important dates in the litigation history. Such datasets are essential for empirical studies on patent litigation[4].

International Collaborations

International collaborations also play a role in shaping the patent landscape.

US-JP Collaborative Search Pilot Program

Programs like the US-JP Collaborative Search Pilot Program aim to enhance the efficiency and quality of patent searches by leveraging the resources of multiple patent offices. This collaboration can help in identifying relevant prior art and improving the overall patent examination process[5].

Challenges in Patent Searching

Despite advancements, patent searching remains a challenging task.

Limitations of Patent Searching

With millions of patents, published applications, and other written publications, there is no guaranteed system to uncover every relevant item. This complexity necessitates continuous improvements in search methodologies and the use of automated systems to facilitate patent claims analysis[2][3].

Key Takeaways

• Increasing Complexity: The number of patent applications and claims is rising, driven by technological innovation and legal precedents.
• Litigation Trends: Patent infringement lawsuits have increased, particularly influenced by the AIA and the role of NPEs.
• Judicial and Administrative Mechanisms: IPR and USPTO's efforts to improve patent quality are crucial in addressing patent disputes.
• Economic Impact: Patent values are influenced by forward citations and technological innovation, with significant economic implications.
• Data-Driven Research: Comprehensive datasets are essential for understanding and analyzing patent litigation trends.
• International Collaborations: Collaborative programs enhance the efficiency and quality of patent searches.

FAQs

What is the impact of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) on patent litigation?

The AIA led to an increase in patent infringement lawsuits by limiting the number of defendants in a single lawsuit, causing plaintiffs to file multiple lawsuits instead of one[1].

How do nonpracticing entities (NPEs) influence patent litigation?

NPEs, which do not manufacture products but own and assert patents, brought about a fifth of all patent infringement lawsuits between 2007 and 2011, significantly impacting the patent landscape[1].

What is the purpose of Inter Partes Review (IPR)?

IPR is an "error correction mechanism" that allows the USPTO to reconsider its own decisions on patent grants, aiming to increase the accuracy of patent grants by allowing third-party challenges[3].

How does technological innovation affect the patent landscape?

Technological innovation drives the need for patent protection, attracting capital for development and commercialization, and facilitates the patent application process through advances in technology such as word processing and remote electronic database searching[2].

What is the significance of the USPTO's Patent Litigation Docket Report Data?

The data provides detailed information on nearly 97,000 unique district court cases, enabling comprehensive empirical studies on patent litigation trends and helping researchers understand the complexities of patent disputes[4].

Sources

1. GAO Report: Assessing Factors That Affect Patent Infringement Litigation[1].
2. Patent Claims Analysis System: US20110138338A1 - Patent Claims Analysis System and Method[2].
3. Inter Partes Review: Is Inter Partes Review Unconstitutional? - Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP[3].
4. USPTO Working Papers: Working papers and book chapters - USPTO[4].
5. US-JP Collaborative Search Pilot Program: US-JP Collaborative Search Pilot Program | Japan Patent Office[5].

Details for Patent 10,556,894

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Merck Sharp & Dohme Llc	GARDASIL	human papillomavirus quadrivalent (types 6, 11, 16 and 18) vaccine, recombinant	Injection	125126	June 08, 2006	10,556,894	2040-02-29