You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: December 28, 2024

Patent: 8,562,979


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 8,562,979
Title:Stable digestive enzyme compositions
Abstract: Compositions of the present invention, comprising at least one digestive enzyme (e.g., pancrelipase) are useful for treating or preventing disorders associated with digestive enzyme deficiencies. The compositions of the present invention can comprise a plurality of coated particles, each of which is comprised of a core coated with an enteric coating comprising at least one enteric polymer and 4-10% of at least one alkalinizing agent, or have moisture contents of about 3% or less, water activities of about 0.6 or less, or exhibit a loss of activity of no more than about 15% after six months of accelerated stability testing.
Inventor(s): Ortenzi; Giovanni (Monza, IT), Marconi; Marco (Cinisello Balsamo, IT), Mapelli; Luigi (Milan, IT)
Assignee: Aptalis Pharma Limited (Wicklow, IE)
Application Number:13/019,844
Patent Claims:see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims summary:

Analyzing the Claims and Patent Landscape of United States Patent 8,562,979

Introduction

United States Patent 8,562,979, titled "System and Method for Managing and Monitoring Cellular Devices," is a patent that has significant implications in the field of telecommunications and device management. This analysis will delve into the claims of the patent, the broader patent landscape, and the critical factors that influence its validity and impact.

Understanding the Patent Claims

To begin with, it is crucial to understand the specific claims made in the patent. These claims define the scope of the invention and what is protected under patent law.

Claim Structure

The patent typically includes a set of independent and dependent claims. Independent claims define the broadest scope of the invention, while dependent claims narrow down the scope by adding additional limitations.

Key Claim Elements

For a patent like 8,562,979, key elements might include:

  • The system architecture for managing and monitoring cellular devices.
  • The methods for data collection and analysis.
  • The interfaces and protocols used for communication between devices and the management system.
  • Any specific algorithms or software components integral to the invention.

Patent Landscape Analysis

A comprehensive patent landscape analysis is essential to understand the position of this patent within the broader technological and legal context.

Geographical Spread

Understanding the geographical spread of similar patents helps in identifying global trends and potential markets. For example, if similar patents are predominantly filed in the United States, Europe, and Asia, it indicates a global interest in the technology[3].

Saturation of the Patent Space

Determining the saturation level of the patent space is critical. A highly saturated space may indicate that the technology area is mature, with many existing patents, making it challenging to secure new patents or avoid infringement[3].

New Entrants and Market Dynamics

Identifying new entrants into the patent space can reveal emerging trends and potential competitors. This analysis also helps in understanding market dynamics, such as the rate of innovation and the level of competition in the field.

Critical Factors Influencing Patent Validity

Patent Quality and Litigation

The quality of the patent, including the clarity and specificity of its claims, is a critical factor. Patents with unclear or overly broad claims are more likely to be involved in litigation. For instance, software-related patents, which are common in the telecommunications sector, often face issues due to unclear property rights[1].

Incentives for Litigation

The potential for large monetary awards can be a significant incentive for patent owners to file infringement lawsuits. This is particularly relevant in cases where the patent is seen as a valuable asset, even if the contribution to the product is minor[1].

Regulatory and Judicial Developments

Changes in patent law and judicial interpretations can significantly impact the validity and enforcement of patents. For example, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) introduced changes that affected the number of defendants in patent lawsuits and the examination process for patents[1].

Impact of AI on Patent Landscape

The increasing use of AI tools in patent drafting and analysis is another factor to consider.

Disclosure Requirements

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued guidance requiring the disclosure of AI tool usage if it is material to patentability. This includes situations where AI systems contribute to the drafting of patent applications or introduce alternative embodiments not conceived by the inventors[5].

Accuracy and Evidentiary Support

Practitioners must ensure that AI-generated documents do not introduce inaccurate statements or omit material information. This is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the patent application process[5].

Strategic Insights from Patent Landscape Analysis

Identifying Niche Areas

A comprehensive patent landscape analysis can help identify underappreciated niche areas within the technology space. This can guide companies in making strategic decisions about where to focus their research and development efforts[3].

Time-Slicing and Trend Analysis

Analyzing patent data over time (time-slicing) can reveal trends and patterns that might not be apparent through single, disparate searches. This helps in understanding the evolution of the technology and making informed decisions about future investments[3].

Case Studies and Industry Examples

SEP Regulation and FRAND Determination

The European Commission's proposal for the regulation of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) highlights the complexities in managing patents within industry standards. The proposal's non-binding FRAND determination process and the potential for implementers to delay court actions illustrate the challenges in balancing patent rights with competition law[2].

Patent Litigation Trends

The analysis of patent litigation trends, such as the increase in lawsuits involving software-related patents, provides insights into the types of patents most likely to be involved in disputes. This can help companies anticipate and prepare for potential litigation[1].

Key Takeaways

  • Patent Claims and Scope: Understanding the specific claims of the patent is crucial for determining its validity and scope.
  • Patent Landscape: Analyzing the broader patent landscape helps in identifying trends, competitors, and potential risks.
  • Regulatory and Judicial Developments: Changes in patent law and judicial interpretations can significantly impact patent validity and enforcement.
  • AI Impact: The use of AI tools in patent drafting and analysis requires careful disclosure and verification to maintain patent integrity.
  • Strategic Insights: Comprehensive patent landscape analysis provides valuable insights for strategic decision-making in research, development, and litigation.

FAQs

Q: What is the significance of patent landscape analysis in the context of United States Patent 8,562,979? A: Patent landscape analysis helps in understanding the broader technological and legal context, identifying trends, competitors, and potential risks, which is crucial for making strategic decisions.

Q: How do changes in patent law affect the validity of patents like 8,562,979? A: Changes in patent law, such as those introduced by the AIA, can affect the number of defendants in lawsuits, the examination process, and the overall validity of patents.

Q: What role does AI play in the patent application process, and what are the associated risks? A: AI tools can assist in drafting patent applications but require careful disclosure and verification to ensure accuracy and avoid introducing material inaccuracies.

Q: How can companies use patent landscape analysis to identify niche areas for innovation? A: By analyzing patent data over time and identifying underappreciated niche areas, companies can make informed decisions about where to focus their research and development efforts.

Q: What are the implications of the European Commission's SEP regulation proposal for patent holders and implementers? A: The proposal introduces a non-binding FRAND determination process that could delay court actions and potentially benefit implementers, while also raising concerns about the limitation of patentees' court access and the accuracy of FRAND royalty rate determinations.

Sources

  1. GAO Report: Assessing Factors That Affect Patent Infringement Litigation[1].
  2. Kluwer Patent Blog: A Critical Analysis of the EC Proposal for SEP Regulation[2].
  3. AcclaimIP: Patent Landscape Analysis - Uncovering Strategic Insights[3].
  4. Harvard Business School Library: Patent search: A comparative table of databases[4].
  5. Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC: U.S. Patent Office Issues Additional Guidance on Use of AI Tools[5].

More… ↓

⤷  Subscribe

Details for Patent 8,562,979

Applicant Tradename Biologic Ingredient Dosage Form BLA Approval Date Patent No. Expiredate
Organon Usa Inc., A Subsidiary Of Merck & Co., Inc. COTAZYM pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 020580 December 09, 1996 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Abbvie Inc. CREON pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 020725 April 30, 2009 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Abbvie Inc. CREON pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 020725 June 10, 2011 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Abbvie Inc. CREON pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 020725 March 14, 2013 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Digestive Care, Inc. PERTZYE pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 022175 May 17, 2012 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Digestive Care, Inc. PERTZYE pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 022175 October 06, 2016 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
Digestive Care, Inc. PERTZYE pancrelipase Capsule, Delayed Release 022175 July 13, 2017 ⤷  Subscribe 2027-02-20
>Applicant >Tradename >Biologic Ingredient >Dosage Form >BLA >Approval Date >Patent No. >Expiredate

International Patent Family for US Patent 8,562,979

Country Patent Number Estimated Expiration
South Africa 200905630 ⤷  Subscribe
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 2008102264 ⤷  Subscribe
United States of America 8562981 ⤷  Subscribe
United States of America 8562980 ⤷  Subscribe
United States of America 8562978 ⤷  Subscribe
United States of America 8293229 ⤷  Subscribe
United States of America 8246950 ⤷  Subscribe
>Country >Patent Number >Estimated Expiration

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.