Details for Patent: 6,793,931

Summary for Patent: 6,793,931

Title:	Ectoparasite asphyxiator compositions and methods for their applications
Abstract:	Water-soluble or water-dispersible, substantially air-impermeable, pharmacologically acceptable, liquid barrier compositions for treating ectoparasite infestations on animal skin and hair, wherein the compositions contain at least one monohydric aralkyl alcohol to prevent the ectoparasites from closing their respiratory systems.
Inventor(s):	Precopio; Michael J (Collegeville, PA)
Assignee:	Summers Laboratories, Inc. (Collegeville, PA)
Application Number:	10/195,048
Patent Litigation and PTAB cases:	See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for patent 6,793,931
Patent Claim Types: see list of patent claims	Composition; Compound; Use; Device;

Understanding the Scope and Claims of United States Patent 6,793,931: A Comprehensive Analysis

Introduction

Patent US-6793931-B2, titled "Ectoparasite asphyxiator compositions and methods for controlling ectoparasites," is a significant intellectual property asset in the field of pest control. To fully appreciate its value and implications, it is crucial to delve into the scope and claims of this patent, as well as its position within the broader patent landscape.

Patent Overview

Title and Abstract

The patent titled "Ectoparasite asphyxiator compositions and methods for controlling ectoparasites" focuses on innovative compositions and methods designed to control ectoparasites, which are external parasites that live on the host organism. The abstract provides a brief overview of the invention, highlighting the key components and their functions.

Claims Analysis

Independent and Dependent Claims

The patent includes a combination of independent and dependent claims. Independent claims define the broad scope of the invention, while dependent claims narrow down the scope by adding specific limitations or features to the independent claims. Understanding the interplay between these claims is essential for determining the patent's overall coverage and value.

Claim Structure and Strategy

Effective claim management is critical in maximizing the value of a patent. The initial patent application filing fee in the United States covers up to 3 independent claims and a total of 20 claims. Strategic management of these claims, such as consolidating multiple dependent claims into broader independent claims, can enhance the patent's breadth and flexibility without incurring additional costs[2].

Practical Application and Technical Improvements

For a patent to be eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, it must demonstrate a practical application or technical improvement. In the case of US-6793931-B2, the claims must show how the ectoparasite asphyxiator compositions and methods provide a concrete technological advancement or solution to a technical problem. This could involve improvements in the efficacy, safety, or ease of use of the compositions and methods compared to existing solutions[1].

Scope Concepts and Claim Coverage

Claim Coverage Matrix

To understand the scope of the patent, a Claim Coverage Matrix can be used. This matrix categorizes patents by claims and overarching scope concepts, helping to identify which patents and claims are actively protecting the intellectual property. For US-6793931-B2, this would involve analyzing the claims in relation to the broader scope concepts of ectoparasite control, composition formulation, and application methods[3].

High, Medium, and Low Value Claims

The value of each claim can be categorized as high, medium, or low based on its current and potential future impact on the company. High-value claims are those that are crucial to the company's current products or services, while medium-value claims indicate potential future directions. Low-value claims may not be worth maintaining. This categorization helps in strategic decision-making regarding patent maintenance and enforcement[3].

Patent Landscape and Competitor Analysis

Tracking Patents by Claims and Scope Concepts

To navigate the patent landscape effectively, it is important to track patents not just by individual claims but also by the broader scope concepts they cover. This approach allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the competitive environment and helps in identifying gaps or opportunities in the existing patent coverage[3].

Interactive Claim Charts

Using interactive claim charts generated by tools like ClaimScape®, technical experts can quickly review patent coverage and determine whether specific scope concepts are applicable to target products or methods. This method is particularly useful for identifying areas where there may be gaps in the current coverage and highlighting future design opportunities[3].

Regulatory and Legal Considerations

Terminal Disclaimers and Double Patenting

The USPTO has proposed changes to terminal disclaimer practices, which could impact the prosecution, licensing, and litigation strategies related to US-6793931-B2. Terminal disclaimers are used to address obviousness type double patenting rejections. The proposed rule aims to promote competition by lowering the costs of challenging groups of patents tied by terminal disclaimers, which could affect the enforceability and validity of the patent[5].

Section 101 Eligibility

The patent must comply with the subject matter eligibility criteria under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This involves a two-pronged framework where the first prong checks if the claim recites an abstract idea, and the second prong evaluates if the claim integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. For US-6793931-B2, demonstrating that the claimed compositions and methods reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or another technology or technical field is crucial[1].

Strategic Claim Management

Adding and Adjusting Claims

Strategic claim management involves adding new dependent claims for every claim that is canceled to maximize the patent's breadth and flexibility. This practice ensures that the final patent utilizes the full quota of claims entitled by the filing fee, enhancing its defensive capabilities and value in licensing discussions or infringement disputes[2].

Building a Compelling Narrative

Formulating a convincing argument under Prong Two of the subject matter eligibility analysis requires building a compelling narrative around the main novelty of the claimed invention. This involves identifying the unique aspects of the invention, framing them within a broader context, and emphasizing their practical utility and real-world impact. The narrative must be supported by the specification and guide the examiner through a clear and logical progression from the technical problem to the claimed innovation[1].

Key Takeaways

• Claims Structure: Effective management of independent and dependent claims is crucial for maximizing the patent's value.
• Practical Application: Demonstrating a practical application or technical improvement is essential for overcoming section 101 rejections.
• Scope Concepts: Categorizing claims by scope concepts helps in understanding the patent's coverage and identifying gaps or opportunities.
• Regulatory Compliance: Staying updated with regulatory changes, such as those related to terminal disclaimers, is vital for maintaining the patent's enforceability.
• Strategic Narrative: Building a compelling narrative around the invention's novelty and practical utility is key to successful patent prosecution.

FAQs

Q: What is the significance of Prong Two in the subject matter eligibility analysis for patents like US-6793931-B2?

A: Prong Two is critical as it requires demonstrating that the claim elements integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, showing an improvement in the functioning of a computer or another technology or technical field.

Q: How can a Claim Coverage Matrix help in understanding the scope of US-6793931-B2?

A: A Claim Coverage Matrix categorizes patents by claims and scope concepts, helping to identify which patents and claims are actively protecting the intellectual property and highlighting gaps or opportunities.

Q: What are the proposed changes to terminal disclaimer practices by the USPTO, and how might they impact US-6793931-B2?

A: The proposed changes aim to promote competition by requiring specific language in terminal disclaimers, which could affect the enforceability and validity of the patent by narrowing validity disputes and reducing litigation costs.

Q: Why is strategic claim management important for maximizing the value of a patent?

A: Strategic claim management ensures that the patent utilizes its full entitlement of claims, enhancing its defensive capabilities and value in licensing discussions or infringement disputes.

Q: How can interactive claim charts assist in reviewing patent coverage for US-6793931-B2?

A: Interactive claim charts generated by tools like ClaimScape® help technical experts quickly review patent coverage, determine applicable scope concepts, and identify gaps or opportunities in the current coverage.

Sources

1. Baker Botts, "The Importance of Prong Two of Step 2A for AI Inventions," September 2024.
2. Harrity LLP, "Maximizing Patent Value: A Strategic Approach to Claim Management," February 2024.
3. Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, "Patent Analytics," 2024.
4. PubChem, "Ectoparasite asphyxiator compositions and methods for controlling ectoparasites," US-6793931-B2.
5. Stern Kessler Goldstein & Fox, "United States Patent and Trademark Office Proposes Changes to Terminal Disclaimer Practice," May 2024.

Drugs Protected by US Patent 6,793,931

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