When do biologic drug patents expire and when will biosimilars launch?

United States Patent 7,199,223: A Comprehensive Analysis

Introduction

The United States Patent 7,199,223, titled "Polymer-factor VIII moiety conjugates," is a significant patent in the field of biotechnology, particularly in the treatment of hemophilia A. This patent, issued to Bioverativ Therapeutics, Inc., involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance the half-life and stability of the protein. Here, we will delve into the key aspects of this patent, including its claims, prosecution history, and the broader patent landscape.

Background and Invention

Overview of Factor VIII

Factor VIII is a crucial protein in the blood clotting cascade, and its deficiency or dysfunction leads to hemophilia A, a severe bleeding disorder. The invention described in the patent aims to improve the therapeutic efficacy of Factor VIII by conjugating it with polymers, such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), to increase its half-life and reduce the frequency of injections required for patients[4].

Polymer-Factor VIII Moiety Conjugates

The patent describes a method for conjugating Factor VIII moieties with polymers, resulting in conjugates that have improved pharmacokinetic properties. These conjugates are designed to maintain the biological activity of Factor VIII while enhancing its stability and circulation time in the bloodstream[4].

Claims and Claim Construction

Claim Scope

The patent includes multiple claims that define the scope of the invention. Claim 14 of the original application, for instance, initially included biologically active fragments, deletion variants, substitution variants, or addition variants of Factor VIII. However, during the prosecution, these variants were removed to address a written description rejection by the patent examiner[1].

Lexicographical Definition and Prosecution History

The term "Factor VIII moiety" is defined lexicographically within the patent specification. The definition hinges on whether the protein exhibits Factor VIII activity, regardless of its underlying amino acid sequence. The prosecution history reveals that the applicant did not disclaim the scope of "Factor VIII moiety" during the patent application process. The removal of "variants" from the claims was not deemed sufficient to establish a clear and unmistakable disavowal of scope[1].

Patentability Requirements

Eligible Subject Matter

The invention falls under the category of patentable subject matter as defined by the Patent Act, which includes "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any improvement thereof." The Supreme Court has clarified that laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable, but the claims in this patent are directed to a specific application of these principles, making them patentable[2].

Novelty and Nonobviousness

For a patent to be granted, the invention must be novel and nonobvious. The patent application must demonstrate that the claimed invention was not previously disclosed in the prior art. In the case of U.S. Patent 7,199,223, the novelty lies in the specific conjugation method and the resulting polymer-Factor VIII moiety conjugates. The nonobviousness requirement is also met as the combination of these elements is not straightforward and requires a level of innovation that goes beyond the ordinary skill of a person in the field[2].

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Inter Partes Review (IPR)

Challenges to Patent Validity

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) introduced significant changes to U.S. patent law, including the creation of PTAB and the process of IPR. PTAB allows for administrative challenges to the validity of patents, which can be more efficient and less costly than judicial proceedings. This mechanism is particularly relevant for patents like U.S. 7,199,223, as it provides a pathway for challenging the validity of such patents based on grounds such as obviousness, lack of novelty, or ineligible subject matter[2].

Recent Developments and Director Review

Recent decisions by the USPTO Director have refined the parameters of IPR, including obviousness determinations and claim construction. These decisions highlight the evolving landscape of intellectual property law and its implications for patent practitioners. For instance, the Director's expansive and flexible approach to assessing obviousness can impact how patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are evaluated in future challenges[5].

Litigation and Patent Landscape

Patent Litigation Data

The USPTO's Patent Litigation Docket Report Data provides comprehensive insights into patent litigation trends. This data can be used to analyze the frequency and outcomes of patent disputes, including those related to biotechnology patents like U.S. 7,199,223. Understanding these trends is crucial for navigating the patent landscape and anticipating potential challenges to patent validity[3].

Industry Impact

The patent landscape in biotechnology is highly competitive, with numerous patents covering various aspects of therapeutic proteins. The issuance and maintenance of patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are critical for companies to protect their innovations and maintain market share. Challenges to these patents, whether through IPR or judicial proceedings, can have significant implications for the industry, affecting the development and commercialization of life-saving therapies.

Key Takeaways

Invention and Claims: The patent involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance therapeutic efficacy.
Prosecution History: The removal of "variants" from the claims did not constitute a clear disavowal of scope.
Patentability Requirements: The invention meets the requirements of eligible subject matter, novelty, and nonobviousness.
PTAB and IPR: Administrative challenges through PTAB can impact the validity of patents like U.S. 7,199,223.
Litigation Trends: Understanding patent litigation data is essential for navigating the patent landscape.

FAQs

What is the main invention described in U.S. Patent 7,199,223?

The main invention involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance the half-life and stability of the protein.

Why was the term "variants" removed from the claims during prosecution?

The term "variants" was removed to address a written description rejection by the patent examiner, as the applicants had not provided sufficient written description for these variants.

How does PTAB impact the validity of patents like U.S. 7,199,223?

PTAB allows for administrative challenges to the validity of patents, which can be more efficient and less costly than judicial proceedings, and can be based on grounds such as obviousness, lack of novelty, or ineligible subject matter.

What are the implications of recent USPTO Director Review decisions for patent practitioners?

Recent decisions refine the parameters of IPR, including obviousness determinations and claim construction, and have broader implications for navigating the patent system.

How does the patent landscape in biotechnology affect the maintenance and enforcement of patents like U.S. 7,199,223?

The competitive nature of the biotechnology patent landscape means that patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are crucial for protecting innovations, and challenges to these patents can significantly impact the industry.

Sources

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE, Case 1:17-cv-01316-RGA-SRF Document 223 Filed 07/22/19.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Inter Partes Review, Congressional Research Service, Updated May 28, 2024.
Working papers and book chapters, USPTO, March 2024.
US7199223B2 - Polymer-factor VIII moiety conjugates, Google Patents.
Examining USPTO Director Review Decisions in the Second Half of 2024, IPWatchdog, December 24, 2024.

Title:	Polymer-factor VIII moiety conjugates
Abstract:	Conjugates of a Factor VIII moiety and one or more water-soluble polymers are provided. Typically, the water-soluble polymer is poly(ethylene glycol) or a derivative thereof. Also provided are compositions comprising the conjugates, methods of making the conjugates, and methods of administering compositions comprising the conjugates to a patient.
Inventor(s):	Mary J. Bossard, Michael D. Bentley
Assignee:	Nektar Therapeutics
Application Number:	US10/789,956
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims summary:	United States Patent 7,199,223: A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction The United States Patent 7,199,223, titled "Polymer-factor VIII moiety conjugates," is a significant patent in the field of biotechnology, particularly in the treatment of hemophilia A. This patent, issued to Bioverativ Therapeutics, Inc., involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance the half-life and stability of the protein. Here, we will delve into the key aspects of this patent, including its claims, prosecution history, and the broader patent landscape. Background and Invention Overview of Factor VIII Factor VIII is a crucial protein in the blood clotting cascade, and its deficiency or dysfunction leads to hemophilia A, a severe bleeding disorder. The invention described in the patent aims to improve the therapeutic efficacy of Factor VIII by conjugating it with polymers, such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), to increase its half-life and reduce the frequency of injections required for patients[4]. Polymer-Factor VIII Moiety Conjugates The patent describes a method for conjugating Factor VIII moieties with polymers, resulting in conjugates that have improved pharmacokinetic properties. These conjugates are designed to maintain the biological activity of Factor VIII while enhancing its stability and circulation time in the bloodstream[4]. Claims and Claim Construction Claim Scope The patent includes multiple claims that define the scope of the invention. Claim 14 of the original application, for instance, initially included biologically active fragments, deletion variants, substitution variants, or addition variants of Factor VIII. However, during the prosecution, these variants were removed to address a written description rejection by the patent examiner[1]. Lexicographical Definition and Prosecution History The term "Factor VIII moiety" is defined lexicographically within the patent specification. The definition hinges on whether the protein exhibits Factor VIII activity, regardless of its underlying amino acid sequence. The prosecution history reveals that the applicant did not disclaim the scope of "Factor VIII moiety" during the patent application process. The removal of "variants" from the claims was not deemed sufficient to establish a clear and unmistakable disavowal of scope[1]. Patentability Requirements Eligible Subject Matter The invention falls under the category of patentable subject matter as defined by the Patent Act, which includes "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any improvement thereof." The Supreme Court has clarified that laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable, but the claims in this patent are directed to a specific application of these principles, making them patentable[2]. Novelty and Nonobviousness For a patent to be granted, the invention must be novel and nonobvious. The patent application must demonstrate that the claimed invention was not previously disclosed in the prior art. In the case of U.S. Patent 7,199,223, the novelty lies in the specific conjugation method and the resulting polymer-Factor VIII moiety conjugates. The nonobviousness requirement is also met as the combination of these elements is not straightforward and requires a level of innovation that goes beyond the ordinary skill of a person in the field[2]. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Inter Partes Review (IPR) Challenges to Patent Validity The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) introduced significant changes to U.S. patent law, including the creation of PTAB and the process of IPR. PTAB allows for administrative challenges to the validity of patents, which can be more efficient and less costly than judicial proceedings. This mechanism is particularly relevant for patents like U.S. 7,199,223, as it provides a pathway for challenging the validity of such patents based on grounds such as obviousness, lack of novelty, or ineligible subject matter[2]. Recent Developments and Director Review Recent decisions by the USPTO Director have refined the parameters of IPR, including obviousness determinations and claim construction. These decisions highlight the evolving landscape of intellectual property law and its implications for patent practitioners. For instance, the Director's expansive and flexible approach to assessing obviousness can impact how patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are evaluated in future challenges[5]. Litigation and Patent Landscape Patent Litigation Data The USPTO's Patent Litigation Docket Report Data provides comprehensive insights into patent litigation trends. This data can be used to analyze the frequency and outcomes of patent disputes, including those related to biotechnology patents like U.S. 7,199,223. Understanding these trends is crucial for navigating the patent landscape and anticipating potential challenges to patent validity[3]. Industry Impact The patent landscape in biotechnology is highly competitive, with numerous patents covering various aspects of therapeutic proteins. The issuance and maintenance of patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are critical for companies to protect their innovations and maintain market share. Challenges to these patents, whether through IPR or judicial proceedings, can have significant implications for the industry, affecting the development and commercialization of life-saving therapies. Key Takeaways Invention and Claims: The patent involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance therapeutic efficacy. Prosecution History: The removal of "variants" from the claims did not constitute a clear disavowal of scope. Patentability Requirements: The invention meets the requirements of eligible subject matter, novelty, and nonobviousness. PTAB and IPR: Administrative challenges through PTAB can impact the validity of patents like U.S. 7,199,223. Litigation Trends: Understanding patent litigation data is essential for navigating the patent landscape. FAQs What is the main invention described in U.S. Patent 7,199,223? The main invention involves the conjugation of Factor VIII moieties with polymers to enhance the half-life and stability of the protein. Why was the term "variants" removed from the claims during prosecution? The term "variants" was removed to address a written description rejection by the patent examiner, as the applicants had not provided sufficient written description for these variants. How does PTAB impact the validity of patents like U.S. 7,199,223? PTAB allows for administrative challenges to the validity of patents, which can be more efficient and less costly than judicial proceedings, and can be based on grounds such as obviousness, lack of novelty, or ineligible subject matter. What are the implications of recent USPTO Director Review decisions for patent practitioners? Recent decisions refine the parameters of IPR, including obviousness determinations and claim construction, and have broader implications for navigating the patent system. How does the patent landscape in biotechnology affect the maintenance and enforcement of patents like U.S. 7,199,223? The competitive nature of the biotechnology patent landscape means that patents like U.S. 7,199,223 are crucial for protecting innovations, and challenges to these patents can significantly impact the industry. Sources IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE, Case 1:17-cv-01316-RGA-SRF Document 223 Filed 07/22/19. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Inter Partes Review, Congressional Research Service, Updated May 28, 2024. Working papers and book chapters, USPTO, March 2024. US7199223B2 - Polymer-factor VIII moiety conjugates, Google Patents. Examining USPTO Director Review Decisions in the Second Half of 2024, IPWatchdog, December 24, 2024. More… ↓ ⤷ Try for Free

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate

Novo Nordisk Inc.	ESPEROCT	antihemophilic factor (recombinant), glycopegylated-exei	For Injection	125671	February 19, 2019	⤷ Try for Free	2023-02-26
>Applicant	>Tradename	>Biologic Ingredient	>Dosage Form	>BLA	>Approval Date	>Patent No.	>Expiredate

Patent: 7,199,223

Summary for Patent: 7,199,223