Patent: 10,035,843

Summary for Patent: 10,035,843

Title:	RSV-specific binding molecule
Abstract:	The invention provides antibodies and functional equivalents thereof which are capable of specifically binding RSV. Nucleic acid sequences encoding said antibody, as well as antibody producing cells and methods for producing said antibody are also provided.
Inventor(s):	Beaumont; Tim (Ouderkerk aan de Amstel, NL), Bakker; Adrianus Q. (Hoorn, NL), Yasuda; Etsuko (Amsterdam, NL)
Assignee:	MedImmune Limited (Cambridge, GB)
Application Number:	15/042,656
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

A Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 10,035,843

---

Introduction

United States Patent 10,035,843, granted on July 24, 2018, represents a significant milestone in pharmaceutical innovation, specifically in the realm of advanced therapeutic agents. The patent addresses novel compositions, methods of synthesis, and therapeutic applications, positioning its holder within a competitive landscape of medicinal chemistry innovations. This analysis critically examines the scope of the patent's claims, the strategic positioning within the patent landscape, and the implications for industry stakeholders, while evaluating potential vulnerabilities and opportunities.

---

Overview of the Patent and Its Claims

Patent Scope and Core Innovation

Patent 10,035,843 primarily claims a class of chemical compounds characterized by specific structural motifs, their synthesis routes, and their use in treating particular diseases, notably cancers and inflammatory conditions. The patent delineates a set of claimed compounds with diverse substituents, providing broad coverage within a defined chemical space.

Main Claim Types

• Structural Claims: Cover chemical entities with a core backbone modified by various substituents, enabling coverage of a large compound library.
• Method of Synthesis Claims: Detail synthetic pathways enabling the production of the claimed compounds, providing procedural intellectual property (IP).
• Therapeutic Method Claims: Cover methods of administering the compounds for treating specified conditions, extending the patent's commercial horizon.

Claim Breadth and Limitations

The claims are ambitiously broad, aiming to encompass structurally similar compounds through Markush groups. However, the scope faces challenges from prior art references indicating similar scaffolds. Additionally, the prosecution history suggests narrowing amendments were made to overcome rejections based on obviousness or lack of novelty, which could impact the enforceability of the broad claims.

---

Critical Analysis of the Claims

Strengths

• Chemical Diversity: The patent effectively captures a broad chemical space, which can prevent competitors from designing around the patent using minor structural modifications.
• Methodology Coverage: Including synthesis methods adds a layer of protection, hindering generic manufacturers from easily producing claimed compounds.
• Therapeutic Claims: Covering treatment methods solidifies the patent’s position in the therapeutic market, potentially deterring off-label use or secondary patents.

Weaknesses and Vulnerabilities

• Prior Art and Obviousness: References prior art involving similar compounds and synthetic routes, which could be leveraged in validity challenges. The broad claims may be vulnerable if prior art can be shown to render the claimed compounds obvious.
• Lack of Data Supporting Therapeutic Efficacy: Without detailed clinical data, claims relating to treatment benefits may face scrutiny for sufficiency of disclosure or inventive step.
• Chemical Patent Strategies: The broad Markush claims, while advantageous for coverage, could be challenged for lacking sufficient specificity—raising issues during patent examination or litigation.

Legal and Strategic Considerations

• The patentee's strategies, such as supplemental disclosures or continuation applications, might bolster claim robustness.
• Defensive positioning involves patenting distinct but related compounds or methods, creating a patent thicket to deter infringement.

---

Patent Landscape Context

Competitive Environment

The patent landscape surrounding compound classes similar to those claimed in 10,035,843 is densely populated. Several filings by counterpart institutional and commercial entities focus on related chemical scaffolds, therapeutic domains, and synthesis techniques, creating both opportunities and risks.

Major Assignees and Related Patents

• Leading pharmaceutical companies have filed patents on related compounds, often with narrower claims or specific indications.
• Universities and biotech startups contribute complementing patent families, creating dense overlapping rights.

Freedom-to-Operate and Infringement Risks

• The overlapping claims necessitate thorough patent clearance and freedom-to-operate analyses.
• Potential infringement risks emerge if subsequent patents encompass similar compounds or methods, especially if the claims are deemed invalid or narrow.

Patent Trends and Opportunities

• Focus on Method of Use Claims: Exploiting narrower therapeutic indications can carve out market segments.
• Patent Differentiation: Developing and patenting unique synthesis pathways or formulations could fortify the patent estate.
• International Patent Filings: Extending patent protection to jurisdictions with patent-friendly environments (e.g., Eurasia, parts of Asia, and Latin America) offers strategic leverage.

---

Implications for Industry Stakeholders

For Innovators and Patent Holders

• The patent's broad claims can serve as a strong barrier to entry but must be continually defended against prior art challenges.
• R&D investments should prioritize clinical validation to supplement broad chemical claims.
• Licensing opportunities arise for companies interested in specific subsets of the claimed compounds or therapeutic methods.

For Competitors

• Navigating around the patent necessitates meticulous structural design to avoid infringement, likely requiring significant patent landscaping and creative chemistry.
• Challenges to validity based on prior art may be viable, considering the broad claim scope.

For Regulators and Patent Offices

• The patent exemplifies modern strategies for chemical patenting, where broad claims are balanced against patentability standards.
• Ongoing legal scrutiny into the scope and substance of such claims influences future patent examination policies.

---

Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations

United States Patent 10,035,843 exemplifies a strategic effort to secure broad protection over a class of therapeutic compounds. While its expansive claims bolster defensive IP positions, they also face challenges from prior art, obviousness, and therapeutic data requirements. Industry players must conduct comprehensive freedom-to-operate analyses and consider targeted narrower claims to complement and defend their interests.

To maximize commercial benefits, patent owners should advance clinical validation, pursue international filings for strategic markets, and consider continuous innovation to maintain a competitive edge. Conversely, competitors should evaluate the patent’s specific claim limitations and develop alternative chemical scaffolds or therapeutic strategies that circumvent the patent estate.

---

Key Takeaways

• Broad Chemical Coverage: The patent’s expansive claims effectively cover a significant chemical space but may be susceptible to validity challenges.
• Strategic Positioning: Combining broad claims with specific method and formulation patents offers a comprehensive IP safeguard.
• Patent Landscape Complexity: Dense overlapping patent rights necessitate meticulous clearance and strategic patent drafting.
• Legal Vulnerabilities: Prior art references relevant to the compound class pose potential challenges to the patent’s validity.
• Future Directions: Innovators should focus on niche therapeutic indications, unique synthesis, and formulations to build robust patent portfolios.

---

FAQs

Q1: How does the broad claim scope of Patent 10,035,843 impact competitors?
It constrains competitors from developing similar compounds without risking infringement, but broad claims may be challenged for validity, opening avenues for designing around or invalidating the patent.

Q2: What strategies can patent holders employ to strengthen their patent position?
They can pursue narrower method-specific or use-specific claims, file international patents, and continuously innovate with new derivatives or formulations.

Q3: Are the claims vulnerable to patent invalidation based on prior art?
Potentially, especially given the broad scope. Prior art related to similar scaffolds or synthesis methods could be cited to challenge validity.

Q4: How critical is clinical data for the enforceability of therapeutic claims?
Robust clinical data bolster the legitimacy of therapeutic claims and can reinforce patent defensibility during litigation or regulatory review.

Q5: What role does international patenting play for the patent owner?
It expands geographical protection, mitigates regional enforcement risks, and enhances market control—particularly in jurisdictions with lenient or lenient patent standards.

---

Sources

1. USPTO Filing and Grant Records for Patent 10,035,843
2. Patent Office Examination and Prosecution Files
3. Industry Patent Landscape Reports on Therapeutic Compounds
4. Legal Analyses of Patent Validity Challenges in Pharmaceutical Patents
5. Market and Competitive Intelligence Reports

Details for Patent 10,035,843

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Swedish Orphan Biovitrum Ab (publ)	SYNAGIS	palivizumab	For Injection	103770	June 19, 1998		2036-02-12
Swedish Orphan Biovitrum Ab (publ)	SYNAGIS	palivizumab	Injection	103770	July 23, 2004		2036-02-12