Details for Patent: 6,787,161

Summary for Patent: 6,787,161

Title:	Anti-cancer compounds
Abstract:	This invention relates to a compound or group of compounds present in an active principle derived from plants of species Euphorbia peplus, Euphorbia hirta and Euphorbia drummondii, and to pharmaceutical compositions comprising these compounds. Extracts from these plants have been found to show selective cytotoxicity against several different cancer cell lines. The compounds are useful in effective treatment of cancers, particularly malignant melanomas and squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs). In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the compound is selected from the group consisting of jatrophanes, pepluanes, paralianes and ingenanes, and pharmaceutically-acceptable salts or esters thereof, and more particularly jatrophanes of Conformation II.
Inventor(s):	Aylward; James Harrison (Queensland, AU)
Assignee:	Peplin Biotech Pty. Ltd. (Fortitude Valley, AU)
Application Number:	09/888,178
Patent Litigation and PTAB cases:	See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for patent 6,787,161
Patent Claim Types: see list of patent claims	Use; Process;

Understanding the Scope and Claims of United States Patent 6,787,161

Introduction

The United States Patent 6,787,161, hereafter referred to as the '161 patent, is part of a series of patents held by LEO Pharma, Inc., particularly related to the drug Picato®. This patent is crucial in the context of treating cancerous conditions using specific compounds derived from the Euphorbia species.

Background of the Patent

The '161 patent is one of the Aylward patents, a group of related patents sharing a common specification and having James Harrison Aylward as the named inventor. These patents are directed towards methods of treating various cancerous conditions using ingenane compounds, specifically ingenol mebutate[4].

Claim Construction

The claims of the '161 patent are specifically directed towards treating cancerous conditions with compounds obtained from the sap of Euphorbia species. Here are some key points regarding the claim construction:

Claim Scope

The claims are narrowly defined to include compounds derived from plants of the genus Euphorbia. The specification repeatedly identifies plants as the source of these isolated compounds, emphasizing that all disclosed embodiments of the compound are derived from a plant[4].

Intrinsic Evidence

The meaning of claim terms is derived from the entire patent specification and the prosecution history. For the '161 patent, the intrinsic evidence includes the specification, abstract, and examples provided, which consistently point to the plant-based origin of the compounds[1][4].

Ordinary Meaning

The ordinary meaning of claim terms is determined by what the term would mean to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. In this case, the term "isolated compound" is understood to refer to compounds isolated from Euphorbia species[1].

Patent Landscape Analysis

Technological Domain

Patent landscape analysis for the '161 patent involves understanding the broader technological domain of cancer treatment using ingenane compounds. This analysis helps in identifying competitors, market trends, and potential risks and opportunities.

Legal Status and Expiry Dates

The '161 patent is part of a suite of patents that have been subject to various legal proceedings. Understanding the legal status (whether alive, pending, lapsed, revoked, or expired) and expected expiry dates is crucial for strategic decision-making. For instance, knowing when these patents are set to expire can help in planning for generic entries or licensing agreements[5].

Market Developments

Patent landscape studies reveal significant market developments such as mergers and acquisitions, in/out-licensing activities, and litigation. In the case of the '161 patent, LEO Pharma has been involved in several legal battles against generic manufacturers like Actavis and Perrigo, highlighting the competitive landscape in this domain[2][4].

Metrics for Measuring Patent Scope

Independent Claim Length and Count

Research suggests that patent scope can be measured using metrics such as independent claim length and independent claim count. Narrower claims, as seen in the '161 patent, are often associated with a higher probability of grant and a shorter examination process. This indicates that the '161 patent, with its specific and narrow claims, likely underwent a rigorous examination process to ensure its validity[3].

Litigation and Infringement

Infringement Allegations

LEO Pharma has filed several complaints alleging infringement of the '161 patent by generic manufacturers. These allegations are part of larger Hatch-Waxman suits aimed at protecting the intellectual property rights associated with Picato®[2][4].

Claim Construction Disputes

The court's construction of claim terms has been a critical aspect of these litigation cases. The court's recommendations on claim construction have helped in clarifying the scope of the '161 patent and its applicability to the alleged infringing products[4].

Key Takeaways

• Narrow Claim Scope: The '161 patent has a narrow claim scope focused on compounds derived from Euphorbia species.
• Intrinsic Evidence: The meaning of claim terms is derived from the entire patent specification and prosecution history.
• Patent Landscape: Understanding the legal status, expiry dates, and market developments is crucial for strategic planning.
• Litigation: The patent has been subject to several infringement allegations and claim construction disputes.

FAQs

1. What is the primary focus of the '161 patent? The '161 patent is focused on treating cancerous conditions using specific compounds obtained from the sap of Euphorbia species.

2. How is the scope of the '161 patent defined? The scope is defined by the intrinsic evidence from the patent specification and prosecution history, indicating that the compounds must be derived from plants of the genus Euphorbia.

3. What metrics can be used to measure the scope of the '161 patent? Metrics such as independent claim length and independent claim count can be used to measure the scope of the patent.

4. Why is patent landscape analysis important for the '161 patent? Patent landscape analysis helps in understanding competitors, market trends, and potential risks and opportunities, which is crucial for strategic decision-making.

5. What legal proceedings have involved the '161 patent? The '161 patent has been involved in several Hatch-Waxman suits and infringement allegations against generic manufacturers like Actavis and Perrigo.

Sources

1. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT ... - [PDF]
2. REDACTED PUBLIC VERSION - [PDF]
3. Patent Claims and Patent Scope - SSRN
4. Case 1:16-cv-00430-JFB-SRF Document 161 Filed 12/28 ... - GovInfo
5. Navigating Technological Domains with Patent Landscape Analysis - Sagacious Research

Drugs Protected by US Patent 6,787,161

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

Foreign Priority and PCT Information for Patent: 6,787,161

Foriegn Application Priority Data
Foreign Country	Foreign Patent Number	Foreign Patent Date
Australia	PO8640	Aug 19, 1997

International Family Members for US Patent 6,787,161

Country	Patent Number	Estimated Expiration	Supplementary Protection Certificate	SPC Country	SPC Expiration
European Patent Office	1015413		C300592	Netherlands
European Patent Office	1015413		CA 2013 00024	Denmark
European Patent Office	1015413		92185	Luxembourg