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

Last Updated: December 22, 2024

Details for Patent: 4,314,081


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 4,314,081
Title: Arloxyphenylpropylamines
Abstract:3-Aryloxy-3-phenylpropylamines and acid additions salts thereof, useful as psychotropic agents, particularly as anti-depressants.
Inventor(s): Molloy; Bryan B. (Indianapolis, IN), Schmiegel; Klaus K. (Indianapolis, IN)
Assignee: Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN)
Application Number:05/432,379
Patent Claim Types:
see list of patent claims
Compound;
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:

United States Patent 4,314,081: A Detailed Analysis of Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape

Introduction

United States Patent 4,314,081, issued to Eli Lilly and Company, is a pivotal patent in the pharmaceutical industry, particularly for the development and commercialization of the antidepressant fluoxetine hydrochloride, commonly known as Prozac. This patent is part of a complex web of intellectual property related to fluoxetine, and its analysis is crucial for understanding the broader patent landscape in this field.

Background

The patent in question, U.S. Patent No. 4,314,081 (the '081 patent), was issued on February 2, 1982. It stems from the original application Serial No. 432,379 filed on January 10, 1974, by inventors Bryan B. Molloy and Klaus K. Schmiegel[4].

Claims of the '081 Patent

Claim 5

Claim 5 of the '081 patent is particularly significant. It depends from claim 1 and covers the compound N-methyl 3-(p-trifluoromethylphenoxy)-3-phenylpropylamine hydrochloride, commonly referred to as fluoxetine hydrochloride, and its pharmaceutically-acceptable acid addition salts. Claim 1 provides a broader formula for a class of compounds, including various substitutions and acid addition salts formed with pharmaceutically-acceptable acids[4].

Scope of Claim 5

  • Compound Coverage: The claim specifically covers fluoxetine hydrochloride and its salts, which are essential for the pharmaceutical formulation of Prozac.
  • Therapeutic Use: While the claim itself does not specify therapeutic use, it is part of a larger patent family that includes methods of using these compounds for therapeutic purposes, such as inhibiting serotonin uptake in the brain.

Patent Family and Progeny

The '081 patent is part of an extensive family of patents and applications that originated from the 1974 filing. This family includes:

  • Divisional Applications: Four divisional applications.
  • Continuation Applications: Three continuation applications.
  • Related Patents: Six patents, including U.S. Patent Nos. 4,018,895, 4,194,009, 4,590,213, 4,329,356, and 4,626,549 (the '549 patent)[4].

Double Patenting Analysis

The '081 patent has been subject to double patenting analysis, particularly in the context of the '549 patent. Double patenting occurs when a patent owner attempts to obtain a second patent for either the same invention or an obvious modification of an earlier patent. In the case of Eli Lilly v. Barr, the court had to determine whether claim 7 of the '549 patent was an obvious modification of claim 5 of the '081 patent.

  • Court Decision: The court found that Barr failed to provide evidence that claim 7 of the '549 patent was merely a scientific explanation of prior art, thus dismissing the double patenting claim[1][4].

Best Mode Requirement

Another challenge to the '081 patent was related to the best mode requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112. This requirement mandates that the inventor disclose the best mode for practicing the invention at the time of filing.

  • Court Ruling: The court held that the specific disclosures argued by Barr as best mode requirements were not necessary under 35 U.S.C. § 112, thus upholding the validity of the patent[1][4].

Patent Landscape

The '081 patent is part of a highly contested and legally complex patent landscape in the pharmaceutical industry.

  • Competitor Challenges: Companies like Barr Laboratories, Inc., Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and others have challenged the validity of Eli Lilly's patents, including the '081 patent, as part of their efforts to market generic versions of fluoxetine hydrochloride[1][4].
  • International Harmonization: The patent landscape is also influenced by efforts to harmonize U.S. patent laws with those of other countries, which can impact the scope and enforcement of patents like the '081 patent[3].

Impact on Pharmaceutical Industry

The '081 patent has had a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry, particularly in the development and marketing of antidepressants.

  • Market Dominance: Eli Lilly's control over the patents related to fluoxetine hydrochloride allowed the company to maintain market dominance for Prozac, a highly successful and widely prescribed antidepressant.
  • Generic Competition: The expiration of these patents and the subsequent entry of generic competitors have significantly altered the market dynamics, making fluoxetine hydrochloride more accessible and affordable[4].

Key Takeaways

  • Specific Claims: The '081 patent specifically covers fluoxetine hydrochloride and its pharmaceutically-acceptable acid addition salts.
  • Patent Family: It is part of a large family of patents and applications related to fluoxetine hydrochloride.
  • Legal Challenges: The patent has faced challenges related to double patenting and best mode requirements.
  • Market Impact: It has played a crucial role in Eli Lilly's market dominance for Prozac and the subsequent generic competition.

FAQs

What is the main compound covered by U.S. Patent 4,314,081?

The main compound covered is N-methyl 3-(p-trifluoromethylphenoxy)-3-phenylpropylamine hydrochloride, commonly known as fluoxetine hydrochloride.

When was the '081 patent issued?

The '081 patent was issued on February 2, 1982.

What is the significance of the '081 patent in the pharmaceutical industry?

The '081 patent is significant because it covers the active ingredient in the widely prescribed antidepressant Prozac, allowing Eli Lilly to maintain market dominance.

What legal challenges has the '081 patent faced?

The patent has faced challenges related to double patenting and failure to comply with the best mode requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112.

How has the expiration of the '081 patent affected the market?

The expiration of the '081 patent has led to the entry of generic competitors, making fluoxetine hydrochloride more accessible and affordable.

Sources

  1. Eli Lilly v. Barr: Double Patenting Analysis Can Be Anything But Obvious - Journal of Intellectual Property Law, Tulane University.
  2. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Interpharm, Inc. - FindLaw.
  3. Mastering Patent Claim Construction - Touro Law Review.
  4. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc. - Casetext.
  5. US4314081A - Arloxyphenylpropylamines - Google Patents.

More… ↓

⤷  Subscribe


Drugs Protected by US Patent 4,314,081

Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date TE Type RLD RS Patent No. Patent Expiration Product Substance Delist Req. Patented / Exclusive Use Submissiondate
>Applicant >Tradename >Generic Name >Dosage >NDA >Approval Date >TE >Type >RLD >RS >Patent No. >Patent Expiration >Product >Substance >Delist Req. >Patented / Exclusive Use >Submissiondate

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.