TIMENTIN IN PLASTIC CONTAINER Drug Patent Profile

Which patents cover Timentin In Plastic Container, and when can generic versions of Timentin In Plastic Container launch?

Timentin In Plastic Container is a drug marketed by Glaxosmithkline and is included in one NDA.

The generic ingredient in TIMENTIN IN PLASTIC CONTAINER is clavulanate potassium; ticarcillin disodium. There are twenty-seven drug master file entries for this compound. Additional details are available on the clavulanate potassium; ticarcillin disodium profile page.

Summary for TIMENTIN IN PLASTIC CONTAINER

US Patents:	0
Applicants:	1
NDAs:	1

US Patents and Regulatory Information for TIMENTIN IN PLASTIC CONTAINER

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Exclusivity Expiration
Glaxosmithkline	TIMENTIN IN PLASTIC CONTAINER	clavulanate potassium; ticarcillin disodium	INJECTABLE;INJECTION	050658-001	Dec 15, 1989		DISCN	No	No

Last updated: May 1, 2026

TIMENTIN in Plastic Container: Investment Scenario and Fundamentals Analysis

What is TIMENTIN in a plastic container from a market and IP lens?

TIMENTIN is a branded formulation of ticarcillin + clavulanic acid (a penicillin/β-lactamase inhibitor combination). The phrasing “TIMENTIN in plastic container” points to a presentation packaging and supply-chain format rather than a new active ingredient. In most jurisdictions, the active ingredient IP estate is driven by composition-of-matter and process patents around ticarcillin/clavulanate, plus downstream formulation, stability, and packaging patents where they exist. For investors, the packaging angle matters because it can affect shelf life, stability, extractables/leachables, and shipping economics, which in turn impacts substitution risk (generic uptake) and tender competitiveness.

How does the product’s pharmacology shape demand stability?

Ticarcillin/clavulanate is used for bacterial infections where clinicians need coverage against β-lactamase producing organisms. Core drivers for sustained utilization include:

• Hospital prescribing for moderate-to-severe infections and serious Gram-negative coverage needs.
• Resistant pathogen mix at healthcare systems that keeps demand for β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor regimens steady.
• Formulary behavior: once a hospital adopts a combination with predictable supply and stability, switching tends to be conservative.

Packaging-specific impacts to consider:

• Plastic container formats can reduce breakage risk versus glass, improving logistics continuity.
• Container and closure choices can improve usability (handling), which can lower procurement friction during high-volume procurement cycles.

Is the plastic container a moat or a tactical packaging change?

A “plastic container” presentation is typically a tactical moat if it is protected by specific packaging-related patents (container material compatibility, fill process, stability windows, microbial barrier, or leachables). If not protected, it usually becomes a cost-and-supply differentiator that generics can replicate when they commercialize at scale.

For investors, the moat question maps to two actionable screens:

1. Regulatory artifact strength: whether the plastic container is linked to unique stability/compatibility data in approvals.
2. IP barrier thickness: whether there is a dedicated packaging patent family or only generic formulation/labeling.

What are the near-term investment fundamentals: revenues, tenders, and substitution risk?

Because TIMENTIN is a known antibiotic combination, the commercial battle is usually not about discovering demand. It is about:

• Tender wins (pricing and delivery reliability)
• Substitution (generic and local brand penetration)
• Inventory and expiry management (impacted by stability and container performance)
• Hospital contracting structure (framework agreements can lock supply)

Plastic container relevance in fundamentals

• If stability extends under the plastic format, it can improve product availability and reduce waste, supporting competitive pricing.
• If the container reduces transport loss, it improves effective delivered volume and tender competitiveness.
• If the container format is widely adoptable, it compresses pricing power and accelerates generic substitution.

How do patent and exclusivity dynamics usually play out for ticarcillin/clavulanate brands?

For branded antibiotic combinations, the highest value IP tends to expire at the active substance level. Post-expiry, brand differentiation shifts to:

• Formulation stability and shelf life across dosing regimens
• Packaging and delivery system performance
• Manufacturing yield and cost
• Regulatory lifecycle management (new presentations, revised container size, new label indications where applicable)

In a plastic-container presentation strategy, the key question for the investor is whether the company holds:

• A presentation-specific patent family (container, closure, or stability-by-design claims), or
• Only a regulatory/technical value without strong enforceability.

When packaging IP exists and is enforceable, the brand can retain an edge against early generic entries in that specific presentation or container format. When it does not, generics can often match quickly by choosing equivalent containers and filing their own stability packages.

What is the likely competitive landscape (brand vs generic) for this packaging-specific view?

From an investment perspective, TIMENTIN in plastic container sits inside a typical post-originator scenario:

• Multiple entrants compete on price, supply reliability, and tender compliance.
• Differentiation narrows to packaging stability, logistics, and formulation handling.
• Hospitals shift when the purchasing delta is material and the clinical substitution risk is accepted.

This yields a practical investment implication:

• Margin durability hinges on whether the packaging format meaningfully improves delivered performance (less waste, fewer disruptions, more usable shelf life) relative to competitors’ equivalents.

Where is cash flow most likely to be created or destroyed?

Cash-flow creation levers:

• Delivered availability (fewer shortages reduce lost tender share)
• Reduced waste (longer remaining shelf life at point of use)
• Tender pricing discipline with reliable fulfillment
• Cross-hospital standardization if clinicians and procurement teams prefer the presentation

Cash-flow destruction levers:

• Shelf-life or compatibility limits that force discounting near expiry windows
• Frequent tender re-awards due to competitor price undercuts
• Packaging disputes (compatibility, leachables concerns) that slow conversion

How should investors underwrite a plastic-container presentation business case?

Underwrite on three quantitative pillars:

1) Shelf life and waste math

• Compare effective usable shelf life at hospital receipt against glass or competitor plastic presentations.
• Model waste reduction as a percentage of distributed volume in tender cycles.

2) Logistics and loss rate

• Model breakage/transport-loss differences versus alternative container types.
• Translate improved shipped-to-received yield into lower cost per delivered dose.

3) Tender dynamics

• Use a sensitivity table for tender pricing:
  • Base-case pricing retention if the plastic container improves usability
  • Downside pricing pressure if competitors replicate packaging and offer lower price

What investment scenarios fit TIMENTIN in plastic container?

Below are scenario frameworks that map to how packaging-specific differentiation typically behaves.

Scenario A: Packaging differentiation is enforceable and extends shelf-life

• Outcome: slower generic substitution in the specific presentation, higher price retention, better availability.
• Investor thesis: packaging-specific stability/compatibility IP limits rapid switching.

Scenario B: Packaging differentiation is technical but not IP-protected

• Outcome: competitors copy presentation within normal commercialization timelines.
• Investor thesis: investors should focus on near-term supply and operational excellence rather than expecting long-lived pricing power.

Scenario C: Packaging differentiation loses traction under tender pressure

• Outcome: purchasing switches to the lowest landed cost.
• Investor thesis: value accrues only through cost-down manufacturing and distribution efficiency.

What due diligence checkpoints determine which scenario is most plausible?

For this specific “plastic container” presentation, the decisive checkpoints are:

• Whether the product’s packaging format is linked to specific regulatory stability claims that competitors cannot easily match without repeating work.
• Whether the firm holds container-material compatibility or packaging stability patents that survive scrutiny.
• Whether supply-chain performance (fill rates, returns, expiry) is measurably better than alternatives.

How do operational fundamentals translate into investment terms?

For a drug with an established antibiotic core, market share tends to move with reliability and unit economics. Investors should underwrite:

• Manufacturing throughput and yield for the container fill process (cost and scalability)
• QA release timelines that protect tender delivery schedules
• Inventory turn and discounting history (expiry risk management)
• Order concentration in major hospital groups (revenue volatility)

Key Takeaways

• TIMENTIN in plastic container is best analyzed as a presentation-level differentiation of a widely used antibiotic combination (ticarcillin + clavulanic acid), where commercial performance depends on stability, handling, and logistics economics.
• The plastic container can be a tactical moat only if there is packaging-specific enforceable IP or regulatory stability differentiation that slows substitution.
• Investment value is most sensitive to tender pricing retention and effective shelf-life at the hospital, because these drive delivered cost and waste.
• Base case for many established antibiotic brands is price compression post-active-substance exclusivity, so the plastic-container angle matters mainly for cost-down and substitution friction.

---

FAQs

1. Is “plastic container” a different drug product or just a packaging format?
   It is typically a presentation-level change; the active drug is still TIMENTIN (ticarcillin/clavulanic acid). The investment impact is driven by stability, handling, and regulatory data attached to that presentation.

2. What investor metrics best reflect packaging value?
   Effective usable shelf life at hospital receipt, waste and expiry discount history, delivered yield (loss/breakage), and tender price retention versus competitors.

3. Does packaging IP usually protect pricing?
   It can, but only if there are presentation-specific, enforceable claims tied to container/closure and stability/compatibility. Otherwise, pricing typically compresses through replication.

4. How quickly do competitors replicate packaging formats?
   When no enforceable packaging-specific barriers exist, competitors can replicate with container selection plus stability package work; substitution can accelerate during routine tender cycles.

5. What is the most likely downside risk for this kind of product?
   Shelf-life under real-world distribution that forces near-expiry discounting, combined with aggressive competitor tender pricing and switching behavior.

---

References

[1] EMA. EPAR product information for ticarcillin/clavulanic acid (combination medicines). European Medicines Agency.
[2] FDA. Labeling and prescribing information for ticarcillin and clavulanic acid products (packaging/presentation information where applicable). U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
[3] Clinical practice literature on β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations and hospital prescribing patterns (ticarcillin/clavulanate utilization).