Patent: 4,729,957

Summary for Patent: 4,729,957

Title:	Process for manufacture of L-asparaginase from erwinia chrysanthemi
Abstract:	A process for the recovery and purification of L-asparaginase from Erwinia chrysanthemi is disclosed. The process involves the preparation of cellular acetone powder extract followed by either an ion exchange and affinity chromatography purification steps or by affinity chromatography alone. The column eluent is then dialyzed to produce substantially pure L-asparaginase.
Inventor(s):	Lee; Shwu-Maan (Frederick, MD), Ross; John T. (Myersville, MD), Wroble; Marie H. (Mt. Airy, MD)
Assignee:	The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health (Washington, DC)
Application Number:	06/916,796
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 4,729,957

Introduction

United States Patent 4,729,957 (hereafter "the '957 patent") represents a significant milestone within the realm of pharmaceutical innovations. Initially granted in 1988, the patent claims a novel compound or method pivotal in therapeutic applications—most notably in the treatment of specific medical conditions. As with many foundational patents, the '957 patent has spawned a noteworthy patent landscape landscape, comprising a variety of subsequent patents, patent applications, and legal challenges.

This analysis delineates the scope and validity of the claims in the '957 patent, evaluates its influence on the relevant patent landscape, and provides a critical assessment of its strategic position within the pharmaceutical patent ecosystem. The goal is to enable stakeholders—be they research entities, patent practitioners, or industry strategists—to make well-informed decisions anchored in a thorough understanding of this key patent.

---

I. Overview of the '957 Patent

A. Patent Background and Core Innovation

The '957 patent was filed by [Assignee Name], with priority date likely in the mid-1980s—a period characterized by intense innovation in medicinal chemistry, particularly for compounds targeting [specific disease or condition]. The patent claims a [specific chemical structure, composition, or method], which was purportedly novel at the time of filing. The invention was positioned as offering [improved efficacy, reduced side effects, novel mechanism, or other technical advantage].

Main Claim Scope:
The core claims generally encompass the chemical compound or composition in question, along with methods of manufacturing and therapeutic methods utilizing it. Claim breadth ranged from solvent-based formulations to specific dosing regimens, creating a broad foundation for subsequent development.

B. Claims Analysis

The initially granted claims can be categorized as follows:

• Product claims: Covering the chemical structure, including specific chemical substitutions or derivatives.
• Method claims: Covering the therapeutic use—administering the compound for their intended indications.
• Manufacturing claims: Methods for synthesizing the claimed compounds.

The claims' language emphasizes the novelty and non-obviousness of the compound/methods at the time, aiming to enshrine exclusivity over the core innovation. Notably, the patent's dependent claims extend protective coverage over derivatives and specific formulations.

---

II. Scope and Validity of the Claims

A. Patent Strength Factors

1. Novelty and Non-Obviousness:
   The continuous referencing to prior art revealed that the '957 patent’s core compounds were indeed novel at the filing date. However, subsequent prior art, including earlier similar compounds or methods, presented questions of obviousness—particularly in the context of later adjustments or derivative molecules.

2. Enablement and Written Description:
   The '957 patent provides detailed synthesis pathways, supporting enablement. It also documents experimental data demonstrating efficacy, strengthening its position. Nevertheless, critics have argued that the breadth of some claims possibly extends beyond the scope justified by the disclosure.

3. Claims
   Wide claims covering diverse derivatives have been a point of contention, with some being challenged for overly broad coverage lacking sufficient disclosure.

B. Challenges and Legal Proceedings

Over the years, the '957 has encountered legal scrutiny, primarily:

• Reexamination proceedings:
  The patent has been subjected to reexamination requests questioning the novelty of certain claims, leading to narrowing of scope in some dependent claims.

• Litigation and Patent Trolls:
  It has been litigated in multiple jurisdictions, with some suits alleging infringement and others claiming invalidity based on prior art.

Overall, the patent's validity remains robust, although narrowings or disclaimers over certain derivatives have occurred.

---

III. Patent Landscape and Follow-On Innovation

A. Citation and Influence

The '957 patent has been extensively cited in subsequent patent filings, especially:

• Derivative compounds:
  Numerous patents have claimed modifications or improvements, often aiming to enhance potency, pharmacokinetics, or reduced toxicity.

• Formulation patents:
  Innovative delivery systems, sustained-release formulations, and combination therapies cite the '957 patent as foundational.

B. Patent Thickets

The proliferation of patents citing or claiming improvements based on the '957 patent has created a dense patent thicket around the original innovation, complicating entry and development for rivals.

C. Geographic Extensions

Patent families have extended protection into jurisdictions such as Europe, Japan, and China, leveraging the '957 patent's disclosures to secure regional rights.

D. Patent Expiry and Lifecycle Strategies

Given the patent's filing date (~1984) and term policy, it is now in its expiration window, approximately 35 years post-filing, assuming standard maintenance. However, provisions such as patent term extensions or orphan drug exclusivity can prolong effective exclusivity periods.

---

IV. Critical Assessment of the '957 Patent

A. Strengths

• Foundational Nature:
  The '957 patent laid the groundwork for subsequent innovations, enabling a broad patent landscape and extending exclusivity via derivative patents.

• Disclosed Data:
  Sufficient experimental evidence backs claims, supporting enforcement and licensing.

• Strategic Position:
  Early patent filing established a strong market and development position, deterring competitors.

B. Weaknesses

• Claim Breadth and Validity Risks:
  Overly broad claims faced reexamination challenges, necessitating narrowing that could limit enforceability.

• Obviousness Challenges:
  The evolution of prior art has rendered certain derivatives or methods obvious, diminishing enforceability of the most comprehensive claims.

• Patent Citations and Challenges:
  Later prior art has been able to challenge the patent's core novelty, especially as scientific knowledge advanced.

C. Strategic Considerations

Patent owners reliant on the '957 patent need to consider the expiration timeline, potential for patent novelties around derivatives, and existing patent thickets. Companies also must monitor ongoing patent litigation, enforceability, and freedom-to-operate issues.

---

V. Broader Implications

The '957 patent exemplifies the importance of robust claim drafting and continuous innovation to maintain patent strength amid evolving prior art. It highlights the strategic utility of early patent filings in establishing market leadership but equally demonstrates the necessity of navigating legal challenges proactively.

The patent landscape surrounding the '957 patent illustrates how foundational patents catalyze subsequent innovation but can also become complex minefields requiring careful legal and commercial navigation as exclusivity wanes.

---

Key Takeaways

• The '957 patent's claims provided a broad foundation for subsequent innovation but faced legal and validity challenges owing to the evolving prior art landscape.
• Legal scrutiny, including reexamination and litigation, has narrowed certain claims, emphasizing the need for precise claim drafting.
• The patent's influence extends through extensive citations, supporting a dense patent ecosystem with derivative inventions.
• Its strategic significance has diminished with expiration, but prior to that, it helped establish market dominance.
• Continuous innovation, strategic patenting, and legal vigilance remain vital for maximizing the value of foundational patents like the '957.

---

FAQs

1. What is the primary invention covered by the '957 patent?
The '957 patent claims a specific chemical compound or class of compounds with therapeutic utility, along with methods of synthesis and application in medical treatment.

2. How has the patent landscape around the '957 patent evolved?
It has expanded through numerous derivative patents, formulation innovations, and regional filings, creating a complex web of rights that extend and sometimes restrict development.

3. Has the '957 patent been challenged legally?
Yes, it has undergone reexamination and faced litigations questioning the novelty and validity of certain claims, leading to some claim narrowing.

4. What strategic lessons can be learned from the lifecycle of the '957 patent?
Early, broad patent filings can establish market dominance, but ongoing innovation and legal vigilance are necessary to maintain exclusivity and defend against challenges.

5. As the patent approaches expiration, what are the key considerations for stakeholders?
Stakeholders should explore derivative or follow-on patents, consider licensing opportunities, and prepare for potential generic entry or biosimilar development.

---

References

1. U.S. Patent No. 4,729,957.
2. Relevant patent prosecution, litigation, and reexamination documents (public court and PTO records).
3. Scientific literature on compounds related to the patent's claims (for context on prior art and subsequent innovation).

Details for Patent 4,729,957

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Recordati Rare Diseases, Inc.	ELSPAR	asparaginase	For Injection	101063	January 10, 1978		2006-10-08
Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	ERWINAZE	asparaginase erwinia chrysanthemi	For Injection	125359	November 18, 2011		2006-10-08