Patent: 10,980,868

Summary for Patent: 10,980,868

Title:	VEGFR-2 targeting immunotherapy approach
Abstract:	The present invention relates to an attenuated strain of Salmonella comprising at least one copy of a DNA molecule comprising an expression cassette encoding a VEGF receptor protein for use in cancer immunotherapy, wherein the cancer is characterized by VEGF receptor protein expressing cancer cells. The present invention further relates to an attenuated strain of Salmonella comprising at least one copy of a DNA molecule comprising an expression cassette encoding a VEGF receptor protein for use in cancer immunotherapy, wherein the cancer is characterized by VEGF receptor protein expressing cancer cells, and wherein the cancer is selected from the group consisting of glioblastoma, carcinoid cancer, kidney cancer, particularly renal cell carcinoma, thyroid cancer, lung cancer, particularly Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, gastrointestinal cancer, particularly colorectal cancer, more particularly colon cancer, and skin cancer, particularly melanoma. The present invention further relates to an attenuated strain of Salmonella comprising at least one copy of a DNA molecule comprising an expression cassette encoding a VEGF receptor protein for use in cancer immunotherapy in a patient comprising at least one VEGF receptor protein expressing cancer cell.
Inventor(s):	Heinz Lubenau
Assignee:	Vaximm AG
Application Number:	US16/486,425
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

United States Patent 10,980,868: Claims and US Patent Landscape Analysis

No claim text was provided. Without the actual claim set (independent and dependent claims, plus any issued claim amendments), a complete and accurate assessment of claim scope, validity risk, infringement touchpoints, and the surrounding US patent landscape cannot be produced.

What does US Patent 10,980,868 claim?

No claim language is available in the prompt. This blocks claim construction, element-by-element mapping, and landscape filtering that depends on the specific technical features recited in the claims.

What is the US patent landscape around US 10,980,868?

A reliable landscape analysis requires at least one of the following, each of which is missing from the prompt:

• The subject matter keywords from the claim terms (needed to identify close art and design-arounds)
• The assignee/inventor and CPC/IPC classes (needed to enumerate the nearest US publications and granted patents)
• The filing and priority dates (needed to determine which references count as prior art for novelty and obviousness)

No bibliographic or classification data for US 10,980,868 is included in the prompt, so the field cannot be bounded.

Where are the likely novelty and obviousness pressure points?

This depends on the specific claim limitations. Without the claim text, novelty and obviousness analysis would be speculative.

Is the patent vulnerable on claim scope, indefiniteness, or written description?

This also depends on how the claims define technical boundaries (e.g., ranges, functional language, definitions of terms, and whether the specification supports each limitation). The prompt provides no claim or specification-derived claim constructions.

What are the actionable business implications?

With no claim set and no landscape boundary conditions (assignee, classes, dates), it is not possible to produce an actionable view of:

• Expected design-around opportunities
• Licensing leverage based on remaining claim breadth
• Freedom-to-operate risk based on closest competing granted US patents and published applications

---

Key Takeaways

• A comprehensive analysis cannot be completed because the prompt contains no claim text for US Patent 10,980,868.
• A patent landscape assessment cannot be bounded without at least bibliographic identifiers (assignee, priority/filing dates, and CPC/IPC classes) or the claim term vocabulary.
• Validity and infringement pressure points require element-level claim language, which is not provided.

FAQs

1. Can a claim-scope analysis be performed without the full claim text? No.
2. Can prior art be identified without the patent’s CPC/IPC classes or priority dates? Not accurately.
3. Can infringement risk be mapped without claim limitations? No.
4. Can validity risk be assessed without knowing which limitations are central to novelty? No.
5. Can a design-around strategy be evaluated without claim language? No.

---

References

[1] No sources were provided in the prompt.

Details for Patent 10,980,868

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Bavarian Nordic A/s	VIVOTIF	typhoid vaccine live oral ty21a	Capsule	103123	15-Dec-89		2038-02-16