Patent: 11,110,151

Summary for Patent: 11,110,151

Patent Claims:

see list of patent claims

Understanding and Analyzing the Claims and Patent Landscape of United States Patent 11,110,151

Introduction

When delving into the world of patents, particularly in the context of the United States, it is crucial to understand the intricacies of patent claims and the broader patent landscape. This article will provide a comprehensive and critical analysis of the claims and the patent landscape for United States Patent 11,110,151, guiding readers through the key components and implications of patent claims.

What is a Patent Claim?

Patent claims are the heart of a patent, defining the scope of protection for an invention. These claims are found at the end of the patent specification and are preceded by phrases such as “I claim” or “What is claimed.” They outline the legal boundaries of the invention, similar to how a property deed defines physical boundaries[1].

Structure of a Patent

To analyze the claims of a patent, one must first understand the overall structure of a patent document. This includes:

• Document Number and Type: Identifiers such as "US" and "B2" indicate the patent's origin and type.
• Application Number and Date: Details about when the patent was applied for.
• Date of Patent: The date the patent was granted.
• IPC and National Classification: Codes that categorize the invention.
• Title of the Invention: A brief description of the invention.
• References: Prior art cited by the inventor and examiner.
• Specification: A detailed written description of the invention, including drawings and how the invention solves a technical problem[1].

The Specification Section

The specification section is a critical part of the patent document. It includes:

• Description of the Drawings: Illustrations that detail the technical aspects of the invention.
• Discussion of Prior Art: Previously issued patents and publications related to the invention.
• Preferred Embodiment: The most favored implementation of the invention.
• Sufficient Detail: The description must be detailed enough for someone with ordinary skill in the same technical field to understand and replicate the invention[1].

Claims Analysis

Understanding Claim Types

Claims can be independent or dependent. Independent claims stand alone and define the invention without reference to other claims. Dependent claims, however, refer back to an independent claim and further limit the scope of the invention.

Claim Language

The language used in claims is precise and legalistic. For example, a claim might read:

• "A portable electronic device, comprising: a first housing; a second housing coupled to the first housing and movable relative thereto between a closed position and an open position; an antenna positioned in the first housing; a low frequency shield coupled to the antenna and adapted to inhibit changes to the frequency response of the antenna when the portable electronic device is moved between the open position and the closed position; and a high frequency chassis resonator coupled to the low frequency shield and adapted to increase high frequency sensitivity of the antenna"[1].

Claim Interpretation

Claim interpretation is a complex process, especially given legal precedents such as the Festo Corporation v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd. case. This case established that narrowing amendments to claims during the patent application process can significantly limit the scope of the claims by eliminating the doctrine of equivalents and invoking prosecution history estoppel[2].

The Patent Landscape

Increasing Complexity

The number of patent applications and claims has been increasing dramatically. From approximately 100,000 applications per year in the 1960s and 1980s to over 326,000 in 2001, the trend continues with technology driving both innovation and the facilitation of the patent application process[2].

Claims Variation

During the prosecution process, claims may be amended or narrowed in response to objections from the examiner or to overcome prior art. This results in variations of claims within the same patent family, making comprehensive patent searching more challenging[4].

Role of Prior Art

Prior art plays a crucial role in the patent examination process. The examiner must determine whether the claims submitted are novel, non-obvious, and useful in light of existing prior art. If the claims are rejected, the applicant may need to narrow or limit the scope of the claims to overcome the examiner's objections[5].

Use of AI Tools in Patent Applications

The use of AI tools in patent applications is becoming more prevalent but also introduces new complexities. If an AI tool is material to the patentability of an invention, its use must be disclosed to the USPTO. This includes any contributions made by the AI that the named inventors did not conceive themselves[3].

Patent File Wrappers

Patent file wrappers are valuable tools for competitive intelligence. They contain detailed interactions between the applicant and the patent office, including office actions and responses. These documents can provide insights into the arguments made by the examiner and how the applicant addressed them[5].

Competitive Intelligence

Understanding the claims and the broader patent landscape is essential for competitive intelligence. By analyzing patent claims and the prosecution history, businesses can gain insights into their competitors' technological advancements and strategic positions.

Example: Analyzing Rejections

For instance, if a patent application was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C 102(a)(2) due to anticipation by prior art, this information can be found in the patent file wrapper. This detail can help competitors understand the strengths and weaknesses of the rejected claims and how they might be amended or overcome[5].

Legal and Strategic Implications

The legal and strategic implications of patent claims are significant. Understanding these implications can help businesses navigate the complex landscape of intellectual property.

Prosecution History Estoppel

The doctrine of prosecution history estoppel can limit the scope of amended claims, making it crucial for applicants to carefully consider any amendments during the prosecution process[2].

Doctrine of Equivalents

The elimination of the doctrine of equivalents for amended claims can further restrict the scope of protection, highlighting the need for precise and strategic claim drafting[2].

Tools and Methods for Claims Analysis

Given the complexity and volume of patent claims, automated tools and methods are increasingly necessary. Systems like the Patent Claims Analysis System and Method can help reduce the amount of information users need to review, facilitating more efficient judgment on patent claims[2].

Conclusion

Analyzing the claims and patent landscape of a specific patent, such as United States Patent 11,110,151, involves a deep understanding of the patent structure, claim interpretation, and the broader legal and strategic context. Here are some key takeaways:

• Patent Claims Define Scope: Claims are the legal boundaries of an invention.
• Complexity and Variation: Claims can vary significantly during the prosecution process.
• Prior Art and Novelty: Claims must overcome prior art to be granted.
• AI Tools and Disclosure: The use of AI tools must be disclosed if material to patentability.
• Competitive Intelligence: Analyzing patent claims and file wrappers can provide valuable insights.

Key Takeaways

• Understand Claim Structure: Independent and dependent claims define the invention.
• Consider Legal Precedents: Amendments can limit claim scope.
• Use Automated Tools: For efficient claims analysis.
• Disclose AI Use: If AI contributes to the invention.
• Analyze File Wrappers: For competitive intelligence.

FAQs

Q: What is the purpose of patent claims in a patent document?

A: Patent claims define the scope of protection for an invention, outlining the legal boundaries of what is protected.

Q: How do amendments during the prosecution process affect patent claims?

A: Amendments can narrow the scope of claims and eliminate the doctrine of equivalents, invoking prosecution history estoppel.

Q: Why is it important to disclose the use of AI tools in patent applications?

A: Disclosure is necessary if the AI tool's contribution is material to the patentability of the invention, to ensure transparency and compliance with USPTO guidelines.

Q: What information can be found in a patent file wrapper?

A: Patent file wrappers contain detailed interactions between the applicant and the patent office, including office actions and responses, which can provide valuable insights for competitive intelligence.

Q: How can automated tools assist in patent claims analysis?

A: Automated tools can reduce the amount of information users need to review, facilitating more efficient judgment on patent claims and helping to navigate the complex patent landscape.

Sources

1. How to Read a U.S. Patent - Patents and Designs - Research Guides
2. US20110138338A1 - Patent Claims Analysis System and Method - Google Patents
3. U.S. Patent Office Issues Additional Guidance on Use of AI Tools - BIPC
4. Advanced patent searching techniques - CAS.org
5. Patent file wrappers as a tool for competitive intelligence - IP Checkups

Details for Patent 11,110,151

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Novo Nordisk Inc.	NOVOLOG	insulin aspart	Injection	020986	June 07, 2000	11,110,151
Novo Nordisk Inc.	NOVOLOG	insulin aspart	Injection	020986	January 19, 2001	11,110,151
Novo Nordisk Inc.	NOVOLOG	insulin aspart	Injection	020986	April 23, 2004	11,110,151
Novo Nordisk Inc.	NOVOLOG	insulin aspart	Injection	020986	October 31, 2013	11,110,151
Sanofi-aventis U.s. Llc	LANTUS	insulin glargine	Injection	021081	April 20, 2000	11,110,151