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

Last Updated: December 22, 2024

Details for Patent: 8,956,661


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 8,956,661
Title:Method of making composite particles for use in pharmaceutical compositions and composite particles and compositions thereof
Abstract: The invention relates to a method for making composite active particles for use in a pharmaceutical composition for pulmonary administration, the method comprising a milling step in which particles of active material are milled in the presence of particles of an additive material which is suitable for the promotion of the dispersal of the composite active particles upon actuation of an inhaler. The invention also relates to compositions for inhalation prepared by the method.
Inventor(s): Staniforth; John Nicholas (Bath, GB), Green; Matthew Michael James (Surrey, GB), Morton; David Alexander Vodden (Bath, GB)
Assignee: Vectura Limited (Chippenham, Wiltshire, GB)
Application Number:13/623,326
Patent Litigation and PTAB cases: See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for patent 8,956,661
Patent Claim Types:
see list of patent claims
Use; Composition; Device; Delivery;
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:

Understanding the Scope and Claims of United States Patent 8,956,661: A Detailed Analysis

Introduction

United States Patent 8,956,661, hereafter referred to as the '661 patent, is a significant intellectual property asset in the pharmaceutical sector. This patent pertains to pharmaceutical compositions for inhalation and the methods of making them. Here, we will delve into the scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape surrounding this patent.

Background of the Patent

The '661 patent is part of a family of patents that include U.S. Patent Nos. 8,303,991 ('991 patent) and 8,435,567 ('567 patent). These patents share a common origin and are related to pharmaceutical compositions, particularly those for inhalation[2].

Scope of the Patent

The '661 patent focuses on composite active particles for use in pharmaceutical compositions. The invention described involves specific methods and compositions that enhance the delivery and efficacy of pharmaceuticals through inhalation. The scope includes the formulation, preparation, and application of these composite particles in therapeutic settings.

Claims of the Patent

The claims of the '661 patent are critical in defining the boundaries of the invention. Here are some key aspects:

  • Independent Claims: These claims define the core invention, such as the composition of the pharmaceutical particles and the methods for their preparation.
  • Dependent Claims: These claims build upon the independent claims, providing additional details and limitations that further define the invention.
  • Claim Construction: The interpretation of these claims is crucial for determining the patent's validity and infringement. Courts consider the literal language of the claim, the patent specification, and the prosecution history when construing patent claims[2].

Claim Construction Disputes

Claim construction is often a contentious issue in patent litigation. For the '661 patent, disputes may arise regarding the interpretation of key terms. For example, the court may need to determine whether certain processes described in the specification are inherent limitations of the claims or merely illustrative examples. The Federal Circuit has established that the specification's references to a method do not necessarily mean that the method is a limitation of the claims unless it is explicitly defined as such[2].

Patent Landscape Analysis

To understand the strategic position of the '661 patent, a patent landscape analysis is essential.

Technology Area

The '661 patent falls within the "Drugs and Medical Instruments" field, which is highly saturated with patent filings. This field has seen a significant decrease in patent allowance rates over time, indicating a more stringent examination process[1].

Competitor Analysis

A comprehensive patent landscape analysis helps identify key competitors and their patent portfolios. For instance, companies like GlaxoSmithKline, which is involved in litigation related to these patents, have extensive patent portfolios in this area. Analyzing the top patent owners and their focus areas can reveal strategic insights into the competitive landscape[3].

Patent Saturation

High patent saturation in a technology area can indicate mature technologies where innovation may be more challenging. However, it also highlights areas where companies are heavily investing in research and development. The '661 patent, being part of a highly saturated area, suggests that the technology is well-established but still evolving, with ongoing innovations and improvements[3].

Strategic Insights

Long-term Decisions

A patent landscape analysis can guide long-term decisions about technology development. If an area is highly saturated, it may be wise to pivot towards newer, less crowded inventive spaces. This analysis helps in identifying such opportunities and risks[3].

Competitive Positioning

Understanding the patent landscape allows companies to position themselves competitively. By analyzing the patent portfolios of competitors, a company can identify gaps in the market and areas where they can differentiate their products or technologies.

Key Takeaways

  • Patent Allowance Rates: The allowance rate for patents in the "Drugs and Medical Instruments" field has decreased over time, indicating a more rigorous examination process.
  • Claim Construction: The interpretation of patent claims is critical and involves considering the literal language, specification, and prosecution history.
  • Patent Landscape: A comprehensive analysis reveals high saturation in the technology area, suggesting mature but evolving technologies.
  • Competitor Analysis: Identifying key competitors and their patent portfolios is essential for strategic decision-making.

FAQs

What is the significance of the '661 patent in the pharmaceutical sector?

The '661 patent is significant because it pertains to pharmaceutical compositions for inhalation, a critical area in drug delivery systems.

How does the patent landscape analysis help in strategic decision-making?

Patent landscape analysis helps in identifying areas of high patent saturation, guiding long-term technology development decisions, and positioning companies competitively.

What are the key factors considered in claim construction for the '661 patent?

The key factors include the literal language of the claim, the patent specification, and the prosecution history.

Why is the 'Drugs and Medical Instruments' field highly saturated with patent filings?

This field is highly saturated due to the extensive research and development activities by numerous pharmaceutical companies, leading to a large number of patent filings.

How does the decrease in patent allowance rates affect the '661 patent?

The decrease in patent allowance rates indicates a more stringent examination process, which can affect the validity and enforceability of the '661 patent.

Sources

  1. Carley, M., Hegde, D., & Marco, A. (2015). What Is the Probability of Receiving a US Patent? Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 17, 203.
  2. Vectura Ltd. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-00638.
  3. Patent Landscape Analysis - Uncovering Strategic Insights, AcclaimIP.

More… ↓

⤷  Subscribe


Drugs Protected by US Patent 8,956,661

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

International Family Members for US Patent 8,956,661

Country Patent Number Estimated Expiration Supplementary Protection Certificate SPC Country SPC Expiration
European Patent Office 1267866 ⤷  Subscribe C300583 Netherlands ⤷  Subscribe
European Patent Office 1267866 ⤷  Subscribe CA 2013 00015 Denmark ⤷  Subscribe
European Patent Office 1267866 ⤷  Subscribe 92166 Luxembourg ⤷  Subscribe
European Patent Office 1267866 ⤷  Subscribe C300651 Netherlands ⤷  Subscribe
European Patent Office 1267866 ⤷  Subscribe CA 2014 00020 Denmark ⤷  Subscribe
>Country >Patent Number >Estimated Expiration >Supplementary Protection Certificate >SPC Country >SPC 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.