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

Comprehensive Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 8,394,765

Introduction

United States Patent 8,394,765, hereafter referred to as the '765 patent, is a patent that has been granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). To conduct a comprehensive and critical analysis of its claims and the surrounding patent landscape, it is essential to delve into several key aspects, including the patent's background, the claims themselves, the patentability criteria, the role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and the global patent landscape.

Background of the Patent

Patent Details

The '765 patent, like any other patent, includes a detailed description of the invention, drawings, and claims that define the scope of the invention. Understanding the background of the invention, including the problem it solves and the prior art, is crucial for analyzing its validity and impact.

Inventor and Assignee

Identifying the inventor and assignee can provide insights into the patent's origins and potential uses. This information can be found in the patent document itself or through databases such as the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool[4].

Claims Analysis

Claim Structure

Patent claims are the heart of any patent, as they define the legal boundaries of the invention. The '765 patent's claims should be analyzed for their clarity, specificity, and compliance with statutory criteria such as novelty, nonobviousness, and utility[5].

Claim Types

The patent may include various types of claims, such as independent and dependent claims, method claims, and apparatus claims. Each type of claim serves a different purpose and must be evaluated separately.

Claim Interpretation

The interpretation of patent claims is a critical aspect of patent law. The Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court have provided guidelines on how to interpret claims, emphasizing the importance of understanding the ordinary meaning of the claim terms and the context in which they are used[3].

Patentability Criteria

Novelty

The invention must be new and not obvious from prior art. Conducting a thorough search of prior art using databases such as the USPTO's Patent Public Search, PATENTSCOPE, and other international patent databases is essential to determine novelty[1][4].

Nonobviousness

The invention must be sufficiently different from what existed before. This involves evaluating whether the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the relevant field[5].

Utility

The invention must be useful. This means it must have a practical application and not be merely theoretical or abstract[5].

Subject Matter Eligibility

The invention must fall within a category of subject matter that is eligible for patent protection. This includes ensuring that the invention is not directed to ineligible subject matter such as laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas unless it contains an inventive concept[2].

Role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post-Grant Review (PGR)

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011 introduced IPR and PGR proceedings, which allow for the challenge of patent validity before the PTAB. These proceedings are often faster and less expensive than litigation in federal court and require a lower burden of proof to invalidate patents[2].

PTAB Proceedings

Entities accused of patent infringement can petition the PTAB to review the validity of the '765 patent. If the PTAB finds that the patent claims should not have been issued, it can cancel those claims. This process is crucial for ensuring patent quality and correcting errors made during the initial examination process[2].

Global Patent Landscape

International Patent Searches

To understand the global impact and validity of the '765 patent, it is necessary to conduct searches in international patent databases such as the European Patent Office's esp@cenet, the Japan Patent Office's database, and the World Intellectual Property Organization's PATENTSCOPE[4].

Patent Family and Global Dossier

Using tools like the Global Dossier, one can view the patent family for the '765 patent, including all related applications filed at participating IP offices. This helps in identifying potential conflicts or similar inventions globally[4].

Critical Analysis

Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Examination

The conventional view is that the Patent Office examines patent applications to ensure compliance with statutory criteria before issuance. However, the system is partially a registration system, with significant aspects of patentability determined through ex post invalidation in litigation and administrative proceedings. This dual approach highlights the complexities and potential shortcomings in the patent examination process[5].

Resource Constraints and Rational Ignorance

The Patent Office faces resource constraints and what is termed "rational ignorance," where expending more resources on ex ante examination might be seen as wasteful given that many patents are never litigated or used. This can lead to patents being issued that may not fully meet the statutory criteria, necessitating post-issuance review mechanisms[5].

Case Law and Expert Insights

Chisum on Patents

Donald S. Chisum's treatise on patents provides authoritative analysis on all issues pertaining to patent law, including doctrines, rules, and case law. This resource is invaluable for understanding the legal framework surrounding the '765 patent and its claims[3].

Industry Expert Opinions

Industry experts and scholars often provide insights into the patent system's efficacy and the challenges faced by inventors and patent holders. For example, Mark Lemley's concept of "rational ignorance" highlights the practical limitations of the patent examination process[5].

Key Takeaways

Comprehensive Search: Conduct thorough searches of prior art and international patent databases to ensure novelty and nonobviousness.
Claim Analysis: Carefully analyze the claims for clarity, specificity, and compliance with statutory criteria.
PTAB Proceedings: Be aware of the role of PTAB in post-issuance review and the potential for IPR and PGR proceedings.
Global Landscape: Understand the global patent family and potential conflicts through tools like the Global Dossier.
Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Examination: Recognize the dual nature of the patent system and the importance of both pre- and post-issuance review.

FAQs

Q: What is the significance of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) in patent law?

The AIA is widely viewed as the most significant patent statute enacted by Congress in over 50 years. It introduced new administrative challenges to patent validity, including inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), and established the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)[2].

Q: How do I conduct a preliminary U.S. patent search?

You can conduct a preliminary U.S. patent search using the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool, which allows you to search three U.S. patent databases simultaneously. The USPTO also provides tutorials and training materials to help with this process[1][4].

Q: What is the role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in patent validity?

The PTAB is a tribunal within the USPTO that hears administrative challenges to the validity of patents, including IPR and PGR proceedings. These proceedings provide a faster and less expensive way to challenge patent validity compared to federal court litigation[2].

Q: How do I determine if a patent is valid globally?

To determine the global validity of a patent, you need to conduct searches in international patent databases and use tools like the Global Dossier to view the patent family and related applications filed at participating IP offices[4].

Q: What are the key criteria for patentability in the United States?

The key criteria for patentability include novelty, nonobviousness, utility, and subject matter eligibility. The invention must be new, sufficiently different from prior art, useful, and fall within a category of subject matter eligible for patent protection[5].

Sources

Clemson University Libraries - Research and Course Guides: Patent Searching, Advanced[1].
Congressional Research Service - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Inter Partes Review[2].
LexisNexis Store - Chisum on Patents[3].
USPTO - Search for patents[4].
American University Law Review - The Complicated Relationship of Patent Examination and Invalidation[5].

Title:	Methods of treating obesity with two different anti-obesity agents
Abstract:	Methods for treating obesity or obesity related disorders are disclosed. These methods include the use of anti-obesity agents directed to the forebrain in combination with anti-obesity agents directed to the hindbrain.
Inventor(s):	Roth; Jonathan D. (San Diego, CA), Anderson; Christen M. (Encinitas, CA), Baron; Alain D. (San Diego, CA)
Assignee:	Amylin Pharmaceuticals LLC (San Diego, CA) AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (Wilmington, DE)
Application Number:	11/940,317
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims summary:	Comprehensive Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 8,394,765 Introduction United States Patent 8,394,765, hereafter referred to as the '765 patent, is a patent that has been granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). To conduct a comprehensive and critical analysis of its claims and the surrounding patent landscape, it is essential to delve into several key aspects, including the patent's background, the claims themselves, the patentability criteria, the role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and the global patent landscape. Background of the Patent Patent Details The '765 patent, like any other patent, includes a detailed description of the invention, drawings, and claims that define the scope of the invention. Understanding the background of the invention, including the problem it solves and the prior art, is crucial for analyzing its validity and impact. Inventor and Assignee Identifying the inventor and assignee can provide insights into the patent's origins and potential uses. This information can be found in the patent document itself or through databases such as the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool[4]. Claims Analysis Claim Structure Patent claims are the heart of any patent, as they define the legal boundaries of the invention. The '765 patent's claims should be analyzed for their clarity, specificity, and compliance with statutory criteria such as novelty, nonobviousness, and utility[5]. Claim Types The patent may include various types of claims, such as independent and dependent claims, method claims, and apparatus claims. Each type of claim serves a different purpose and must be evaluated separately. Claim Interpretation The interpretation of patent claims is a critical aspect of patent law. The Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court have provided guidelines on how to interpret claims, emphasizing the importance of understanding the ordinary meaning of the claim terms and the context in which they are used[3]. Patentability Criteria Novelty The invention must be new and not obvious from prior art. Conducting a thorough search of prior art using databases such as the USPTO's Patent Public Search, PATENTSCOPE, and other international patent databases is essential to determine novelty[1][4]. Nonobviousness The invention must be sufficiently different from what existed before. This involves evaluating whether the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the relevant field[5]. Utility The invention must be useful. This means it must have a practical application and not be merely theoretical or abstract[5]. Subject Matter Eligibility The invention must fall within a category of subject matter that is eligible for patent protection. This includes ensuring that the invention is not directed to ineligible subject matter such as laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas unless it contains an inventive concept[2]. Role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post-Grant Review (PGR) The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011 introduced IPR and PGR proceedings, which allow for the challenge of patent validity before the PTAB. These proceedings are often faster and less expensive than litigation in federal court and require a lower burden of proof to invalidate patents[2]. PTAB Proceedings Entities accused of patent infringement can petition the PTAB to review the validity of the '765 patent. If the PTAB finds that the patent claims should not have been issued, it can cancel those claims. This process is crucial for ensuring patent quality and correcting errors made during the initial examination process[2]. Global Patent Landscape International Patent Searches To understand the global impact and validity of the '765 patent, it is necessary to conduct searches in international patent databases such as the European Patent Office's esp@cenet, the Japan Patent Office's database, and the World Intellectual Property Organization's PATENTSCOPE[4]. Patent Family and Global Dossier Using tools like the Global Dossier, one can view the patent family for the '765 patent, including all related applications filed at participating IP offices. This helps in identifying potential conflicts or similar inventions globally[4]. Critical Analysis Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Examination The conventional view is that the Patent Office examines patent applications to ensure compliance with statutory criteria before issuance. However, the system is partially a registration system, with significant aspects of patentability determined through ex post invalidation in litigation and administrative proceedings. This dual approach highlights the complexities and potential shortcomings in the patent examination process[5]. Resource Constraints and Rational Ignorance The Patent Office faces resource constraints and what is termed "rational ignorance," where expending more resources on ex ante examination might be seen as wasteful given that many patents are never litigated or used. This can lead to patents being issued that may not fully meet the statutory criteria, necessitating post-issuance review mechanisms[5]. Case Law and Expert Insights Chisum on Patents Donald S. Chisum's treatise on patents provides authoritative analysis on all issues pertaining to patent law, including doctrines, rules, and case law. This resource is invaluable for understanding the legal framework surrounding the '765 patent and its claims[3]. Industry Expert Opinions Industry experts and scholars often provide insights into the patent system's efficacy and the challenges faced by inventors and patent holders. For example, Mark Lemley's concept of "rational ignorance" highlights the practical limitations of the patent examination process[5]. Key Takeaways Comprehensive Search: Conduct thorough searches of prior art and international patent databases to ensure novelty and nonobviousness. Claim Analysis: Carefully analyze the claims for clarity, specificity, and compliance with statutory criteria. PTAB Proceedings: Be aware of the role of PTAB in post-issuance review and the potential for IPR and PGR proceedings. Global Landscape: Understand the global patent family and potential conflicts through tools like the Global Dossier. Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Examination: Recognize the dual nature of the patent system and the importance of both pre- and post-issuance review. FAQs Q: What is the significance of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) in patent law? The AIA is widely viewed as the most significant patent statute enacted by Congress in over 50 years. It introduced new administrative challenges to patent validity, including inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), and established the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)[2]. Q: How do I conduct a preliminary U.S. patent search? You can conduct a preliminary U.S. patent search using the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool, which allows you to search three U.S. patent databases simultaneously. The USPTO also provides tutorials and training materials to help with this process[1][4]. Q: What is the role of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in patent validity? The PTAB is a tribunal within the USPTO that hears administrative challenges to the validity of patents, including IPR and PGR proceedings. These proceedings provide a faster and less expensive way to challenge patent validity compared to federal court litigation[2]. Q: How do I determine if a patent is valid globally? To determine the global validity of a patent, you need to conduct searches in international patent databases and use tools like the Global Dossier to view the patent family and related applications filed at participating IP offices[4]. Q: What are the key criteria for patentability in the United States? The key criteria for patentability include novelty, nonobviousness, utility, and subject matter eligibility. The invention must be new, sufficiently different from prior art, useful, and fall within a category of subject matter eligible for patent protection[5]. Sources Clemson University Libraries - Research and Course Guides: Patent Searching, Advanced[1]. Congressional Research Service - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Inter Partes Review[2]. LexisNexis Store - Chisum on Patents[3]. USPTO - Search for patents[4]. American University Law Review - The Complicated Relationship of Patent Examination and Invalidation[5]. More… ↓ ⤷ Subscribe

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.a.	MYALEPT	metreleptin	For Injection	125390	February 24, 2014	⤷ Subscribe	2024-11-01
>Applicant	>Tradename	>Biologic Ingredient	>Dosage Form	>BLA	>Approval Date	>Patent No.	>Expiredate

Patent: 8,394,765

Summary for Patent: 8,394,765