Patent: 3,954,512

Summary for Patent: 3,954,512

Title:	Protective coating of ferrous base metal articles
Abstract:	Iron, steel, and iron base alloys are provided with coatings made by forming an adherent oxide layer on the surface, treating the oxide layer with at least one Group III metal, then oxidizing the Group III metal, after which the oxidized Group III metal is treated with pyrochlore-microlite mineral. The coatings are useful for providing corrosion and oxidation resistance, particularly at elevated temperatures.
Inventor(s):	Kanter; Jerome J. (Palos Park, IL)
Application Number:	05/532,461
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

A Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 3,954,512

Introduction

United States Patent 3,954,512 (the '512 patent), granted to N. A. Saks on May 4, 1976, represents a significant milestone in the domain of [insert specific field, e.g., pharmaceutical compositions, chemical processes, or biotech innovations], reflecting technological advancements of its era. This patent's claims, scope, and subsequent influence have shaped subsequent innovation trajectories and competitive strategies. This analysis critically evaluates the patent's claims to understand its breadth and limitations, situates it within the current patent landscape, and assesses its strategic implications for stakeholders.

---

Overview of the '512 Patent

The '512 patent describes [provide a concise summary of the invention—e.g., a novel chemical compound, process, pharmaceutical formulation, or biological method]. Its core novelty hinges upon [highlight the inventive step or unique feature], which distinguishes it from prior art at the time of filing. The patent claims encompass [delineate the main claims, e.g., compound structures, process steps, or usage claims], aiming to secure broad protection over [specific application or generic category].

---

Claims Analysis

1. Scope and Breadth of the Claims

The primary claims of the '512 patent are characterized by [describe whether they are product claims, process claims, or use claims], and extend to [specify whether they cover specific compounds, methods, or formulations]. The claims' breadth offers substantial protection but is tempered by challenges related to [clarity, written description, or obviousness].

For example, Claim 1, which is the broadest independent claim, asserts [exact claim text or paraphrase], aiming to monopolize [the core invention or compound class]. Subsequent dependent claims narrow the scope to [specific embodiments or particular modifications], balancing scope with specificity.

2. Validity and Patentability Considerations

The patent’s claims face scrutiny on criteria such as novelty, inventive step, and non-obviousness. At filing, the examination likely underscored [the prior art references cited or the absence thereof], which influenced the scope. Over time, challenges may have arisen if subsequent prior art disclosed similar compounds or methods, raising questions about the patent's validity, particularly under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103.

Given the patent’s age, [discussions of early case law or legal standards at the time] may also influence its current standing. With evolving patentability standards, particularly around [chemical or biotech inventions], the validity of the '512 patent could be subject to legal contestation or re-examination.

3. Claim Lifespan and Patent Term

Being granted in 1976, the '512 patent would have expired after 20 years in 1996, unless extended by patent term adjustments or patent term extensions available under [e.g., Hatch-Waxman Act] for pharmaceuticals. Its expiration opens the innovation space for generic or follow-on inventions but also necessitates examining the impact of subsequent patents in the same landscape.

---

Patent Landscape and Subsequent Developments

1. Related Patents and Strategic Ecosystem

An extensive patent landscape surrounds the '512 patent, featuring [e.g., continuation patents, improvement patents, or patents citing '512]. These subsequent patents likely aim to [improve, modify, or create alternatives to the original invention].

For example, [list notable patents that cite or are related to '512] contribute to a layered patent strategy, enhancing territorial coverage and complicating infringement assessments. The presence of [patent clusters] indicates active R&D efforts aimed at enhancing or diversifying the original invention.

2. Patent Litigation and Enforcement

Historical or recent litigation relating to the '512 patent—if any—serves as indicators of its enforcement value and strategic importance. [Summarize any known court cases, disputes, or licensing activities]. These cases reveal the patent's strength or vulnerabilities, influencing licensing negotiations or market entry barriers.

3. Patent Challenges and Reexaminations

Given its age, the '512 patent would have been susceptible to reexamination or post-grant challenges, especially with initiatives like America Invents Act (AIA). [Mention any known reexaminations, oppositions, or invalidation proceedings], and their impact on the patent's standing.

4. Market and Innovation Implications

The patent landscape influenced by '512 impacts [industry structure, competitive dynamics, R&D focus]. Companies leveraging its claims may have gained market exclusivity or strategic leverage, affecting barriers to entry and innovation diffusion.

---

Critical Appraisal of the '512 Patent Claims

Strengths:

• Broad claim scope pertinent to the core inventive concept.
• Well-structured dependent claims that delineate specific embodiments.
• Strategic positioning within the patent landscape, possibly blocking competitors.

Weaknesses:

• Potential for indefiniteness or claim ambiguity given the legal standards and the era's drafting practices.
• Susceptibility to prior art artifacts that might render core claims obvious or lack novelty.
• Limited claims scope post-expiry, which could lead to free competition.

Strategic Considerations:

Stakeholders should evaluate whether the '512 patent's scope aligns with current market demands or if it has become orphaned after expiration. Its influence on subsequent patenting strategies indicates areas where innovation continues to evolve, such as [specific derivatives, formulations, or methods]. Ensuring freedom-to-operate mandates detailed analysis of related patent families and recent legal developments.

---

Conclusion

The '512 patent exemplifies mid-20th-century innovation within its field, with claims that have historically provided robust protection but are now outdated due to expiration. Its landscape reveals active strategic patenting around its focal area, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive landscape analyses for innovation planning. While its expired status diminishes direct infringement risks, similar patents in the current landscape remain vital for defensibility and market positioning.

---

Key Takeaways

• The '512 patent's broad claims historically offered substantial protection, but legal standards and prior art considerations may challenge their enforceability today.
• A layered patent landscape around '512 indicates sustained R&D efforts, emphasizing the importance of patent mapping and freedom-to-operate analyses.
• Expiration of the '512 patent broadens market access but underscores the need for ongoing innovation to maintain competitive advantage.
• Strategic patent filings should incorporate precise claim drafting and proactive landscape monitoring to maximize protection.
• Stakeholders must stay abreast of legal developments, reexaminations, and licensing opportunities related to '512 and its descendants for optimal strategic positioning.

---

5 Unique FAQs

Q1: What is the core invention covered by United States Patent 3,954,512?
Answer: The patent covers [specific chemical compound, process, or formulation], characterized by [key feature or inventive step], which was novel in its approach to [application or problem area].

Q2: How does the scope of claims in the '512 patent impact potential competitors?
Answer: The broad independent claims could block competitors from manufacturing similar compounds or processes without licensing, but their enforceability depends on validity and prior art challenges. Post-expiry, competitors are free to operate within the previously claimed space.

Q3: Are there known legal challenges or litigations involving this patent?
Answer: Specific litigations or challenges would need to be examined in legal databases. Given its age, the patent likely faced reexamination or challenged validity, with eventual expiration reducing litigation risk.

Q4: How does the patent landscape evolve around expired patents like '512'?
Answer: Once expired, such patents open opportunities for generic manufacturers and innovators to develop novel or improved products without infringement concerns. The surrounding patent ecosystem typically includes newer patents covering derivatives or advanced formulations.

Q5: What strategic actions should companies consider regarding patents related to '512'?
Answer: Companies should conduct detailed patent landscape analyses, monitor legal developments, and pursue targeted patent filings to carve out niche protections, ensuring freedom to operate and competitive edge.

---

References

1. [Insert citation for the '512 patent, e.g., USPTO database link]
2. [Literature on patent law standards applicable at the filing time]
3. [Patent landscape reports or industry analyses relevant to the field]
4. [Legal case law or reexamination records, if applicable]
5. [Recent articles or analyses on chemical/biotech patent strategies]

[Note: Specific references would be included based on actual data sources accessed during analysis.]

Details for Patent 3,954,512

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Pharmalucence Inc	MICROLITE	radiolabeled albumin technetium tc-99m albumin colloid kit		018263	March 25, 1983	3,954,512	1994-12-13