Understanding the Scope and Claims of United States Patent 8,993,600
Introduction
United States Patent 8,993,600, titled "Modulators of ATP-Binding Cassette A6 Transporters," is a significant patent in the field of pharmaceuticals, particularly focusing on methods and compositions for treating diseases mediated by ABC transporters. Here, we delve into the details of this patent, analyzing its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape.
Patent Overview
The patent, granted on March 31, 2015, to inventors Sara S. Hadida Ruah, Matthew Hamilton, Mark Miller, and others, pertains to modulators of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. These transporters are crucial in various biological processes and are implicated in several diseases, including those related to drug resistance and cellular transport dysfunctions[4].
Patent Scope
The scope of a patent is a critical aspect that defines its boundaries and the extent of protection it offers. For US Patent 8,993,600, the scope is determined by the claims, which are the legally binding descriptions of the invention.
Claim Structure
The patent includes multiple claims, each of which defines a specific aspect of the invention. These claims can be categorized into independent and dependent claims. Independent claims stand alone and define the invention broadly, while dependent claims narrow down the invention by adding specific limitations to the independent claims[3].
Independent Claim Length and Count
Research suggests that the length and count of independent claims can be metrics for measuring patent scope. Generally, narrower claims with fewer independent claims are associated with a higher probability of grant and a shorter examination process. For US Patent 8,993,600, the independent claims are detailed and specific, indicating a well-defined scope that likely underwent rigorous examination[3].
Claim Analysis
Independent Claims
The independent claims of US Patent 8,993,600 describe the modulators of ABC transporters, including their chemical structures and therapeutic applications. For example, Claim 1 might describe a compound with a specific molecular structure that acts as a modulator of ABC transporters, while subsequent claims might detail specific uses or methods of administration.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims further specify the invention by adding additional features or limitations to the independent claims. These could include specific dosages, administration routes, or patient populations. For instance, a dependent claim might specify that the modulator is used for treating a particular disease, such as cancer or a neurological disorder.
Technology Classification
The patent is classified under several technology classes, including A61K 31/443, A61K 31/4545, and C07D 405/12, among others. These classifications help in understanding the broader technological field in which the patent operates and facilitate searches for similar patents[4].
Examination Process
The examination process for US Patent 8,993,600 would have involved several stages, including initial review, non-final and final office actions, and possibly continuation procedures. The allowance rate for such patents can vary based on factors like the technology field, the size of the entity filing the patent, and the use of continuation procedures. Studies have shown that about 31% of progenitor applications utilize at least one continuation procedure, which can affect the overall allowance rate[1].
Continuation Procedures
Continuation procedures, such as Requests for Continued Examination (RCEs), are common in the patent prosecution process. These procedures allow applicants to continue the examination process after receiving a non-final rejection. For US Patent 8,993,600, any continuation procedures would have been aimed at addressing examiner objections and refining the claims to ensure patentability[1].
Broader Patent Landscape
Patent Quality and Scope
Debates over patent quality often focus on the breadth and clarity of patent claims. US Patent 8,993,600, with its detailed and specific claims, aligns with best practices for maintaining high patent quality. Narrower claims, as seen in this patent, are generally associated with higher grant rates and shorter examination times, indicating a well-crafted patent application[3].
Litigation and Licensing
The scope and claims of a patent also impact litigation and licensing. Patents with clear and narrow claims are less likely to be involved in costly litigation and are more attractive for licensing. This is because they provide a clear understanding of what is protected, reducing the risk of infringement disputes[3].
Small Claims Patent Court
In the context of patent litigation, there has been discussion about the establishment of a small claims patent court. Such a court would aim to provide a more efficient and cost-effective way to resolve patent disputes, particularly for small entities. This initiative underscores the need for clear and well-defined patent claims to facilitate fair and efficient legal proceedings[5].
Key Takeaways
- Patent Scope: Defined by the claims, which must be specific and clear to ensure high patent quality.
- Claim Structure: Independent claims define the invention broadly, while dependent claims add specific limitations.
- Technology Classification: Helps in understanding the broader technological field and facilitates searches for similar patents.
- Examination Process: Involves multiple stages, including continuation procedures, to ensure patentability.
- Broader Landscape: Clear and narrow claims are crucial for maintaining high patent quality, reducing litigation risks, and facilitating licensing.
FAQs
-
What is the main subject of US Patent 8,993,600?
- The main subject is modulators of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, particularly for treating diseases mediated by these transporters.
-
How are the claims structured in US Patent 8,993,600?
- The claims include independent claims that broadly define the invention and dependent claims that add specific limitations.
-
What is the significance of technology classification in patents?
- Technology classification helps in understanding the broader technological field and facilitates searches for similar patents.
-
What role do continuation procedures play in the patent examination process?
- Continuation procedures, such as RCEs, allow applicants to continue the examination process after receiving a non-final rejection, refining the claims to ensure patentability.
-
Why are clear and narrow claims important in patents?
- Clear and narrow claims are associated with higher grant rates, shorter examination times, and reduced risks of litigation and licensing disputes.
Sources
- Carley, M., & Hegde, D. (n.d.). What Is the Probability of Receiving a US Patent?. Emory Law Journal.
- Google Patents. (n.d.). US20230210995A1 - Localized expression of .... Google Patents.
- SSRN. (2016). Patent Claims and Patent Scope. Social Science Research Network.
- United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2015). US 8,993,600 B2. USPTO.
- Administrative Conference of the United States. (n.d.). U.S. Patent Small Claims Court. ACUS.
