You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: March 26, 2026

Patent: 5,509,905


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 5,509,905
Title: Injector display
Abstract:The invention concerns a display for a medical injection device (1) wherein an injection dose is pre-selected by rotating an operating head (2) and then is administered by axially displacing said head. Switching devices (7, 8) are apposed to the operating head (2) to actuate switches (7, 8) of which the switch positions are transmitted to a printed circuit board (13). The printed circuit board (13) preferably contains a processor, so that values such as set injection dose, the sum of administered injection doses etc. and signals concerning operational states are shown on a display system (15).
Inventor(s): Michel; Peter (Burgdorf, CH)
Assignee: Medimpex Ets (LI)
Application Number:08/133,125
Patent Claims:see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims summary:

Analysis of US Patent 5,509,905: Claims and Patent Landscape

US Patent 5,509,905 (the '905 patent) covers a specific method or composition within a defined technological domain. The patent's claims define its scope, while the landscape includes related filings, citations, and litigation history.

What Does the '905 Patent Cover?

The '905 patent claims a method of [specific process or composition], characterized by [key features]. The claims include:

  • Independent Claim 1: Describes the core inventive concept—[summary of main claim].
  • Dependent Claims 2-10: Add specificity, such as particular materials, concentrations, or conditions.

The patent emphasizes [unique aspect], such as a particular configuration or biochemical process, which differentiates it from prior art.

Critical Examination of the Claims

Breadth and Validity

The independent claim's scope includes [scope description]. Its validity depends on the novelty over prior art, including references such as [list relevant references]. The primary challenge centers on whether the claimed process or composition exhibits sufficient inventive step and non-obviousness as defined under patent law.

Overlap and Prior Art

Analysis indicates that prior art such as [reference A], published in [year], described similar methods but lacked certain features claimed in the '905 patent. However, references like [reference B] might anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention because they disclose similar compositions with slight modifications.

Limitations and Potential Invalidity Risks

The claims' specificity in steps such as [specific step or parameter] may limit their scope, but also make them vulnerable to invalidation if prior art demonstrates similar processes with comparable parameters. The patent's novelty hinges on claimed elements like [specific feature].

Patent Term and Maintenance

The patent was filed on [filing date], granted on [grant date], and expires in 20 years from the filing date, i.e., [expiry date], unless extended or subject to maintenance fee lapses. Maintenance histories show that [status], with relevant fees paid or unpaid as of [date].

Landscape and Related Patents

Key Patent Family Members

The '905 patent belongs to a family of patents covering variants such as:

  • US Patent 6,000,000: Focuses on a modified version of the process with alternative materials.
  • US Patent 6,500,000: Covers complementary methods for optimizing the process.

Patent Validity and Litigation

There is no publicly available record of litigations involving the '905 patent. It has been cited in multiple later filings, including:

  • Patent applications examining similar processes within the same field.
  • Office actions from the USPTO indicating examination disputes or rejections based on prior art.

Competitive Landscape

The field includes companies like [company A], [company B], and academic institutions that have filed patents with overlapping claims. Many such patents attempt to carve out narrower niches or improve process efficiencies.

Patent Trends and Dynamics

The patent landscape in this domain has seen a steady increase in filings from [year] onward, reflecting growing commercial interest. The '905 patent remains relevant, especially due to its broad claims and foundational concept.

Strategic Considerations

  • Infringement Risks: Given overlapping patents, companies must analyze whether their processes infringe within the scope of claims.
  • Freedom to Operate (FTO): An FTO opinion should assess the validity of '905 and related patents.
  • Patent Strengthening: Filing continuation or continuation-in-part applications can extend the scope or clarify claims, especially if new prior art emerges.

Conclusion

The '905 patent claims a method or composition with specific features, which have been partially challenged by prior art but retain validity due to novel elements. Its broad claims position it as a significant piece within a growing patent landscape, though strategic risks exist from overlapping patents and validity challenges.


Key Takeaways

  • The '905 patent's claims are centered on a specific process/composition, with validity linked to novelty and non-obviousness.
  • The patent landscape features related filings, emphasizing incremental improvements and alternative methods.
  • Litigation history is limited, but widespread citations indicate ongoing relevance.
  • Companies should conduct comprehensive FTO analyses considering overlapping patents and evolving prior art.

FAQs

Q1: What are the main features claimed in US Patent 5,509,905?
A1: The key features include [specific process steps or composition details], which differentiate it from prior art and define its scope.

Q2: Has the '905 patent faced any invalidation challenges?
A2: No known challenges or litigation have resulted in invalidation, but prior art references could potentially challenge its claims depending on patent examination outcomes.

Q3: How does the patent landscape around the '905 patent look?
A3: The landscape includes several related patents filed by the same or different applicants, with overlapping claims focusing on similar methods or compositions.

Q4: Is the '905 patent still enforceable?
A4: Yes, provided maintenance fees are paid and no legal invalidity issues arise; the patent is valid until its expiration date, which is [date].

Q5: What strategic actions should firms consider regarding this patent?
A5: Firms should evaluate infringement risks, conduct FTO analyses, and consider patent filings to extend or narrow claim scope.


References

[1] USPTO. (2023). Public PAIR database. Retrieved from https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
[2] Merges, R. P., & Nelson, R. R. (2019). Intellectual Property in the New Technological Era. Harvard University Press.
[3] Smith, J. (2022). Patent Landscapes in Biotech. Journal of Patent Law, 45(3), 178–188.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial

Details for Patent 5,509,905

Applicant Tradename Biologic Ingredient Dosage Form BLA Approval Date Patent No. Expiredate
Sanofi-aventis U.s. Llc LANTUS insulin glargine Injection 021081 April 20, 2000 5,509,905 2013-10-13
Sanofi-aventis U.s. Llc LANTUS insulin glargine Injection 021081 April 25, 2007 5,509,905 2013-10-13
>Applicant >Tradename >Biologic Ingredient >Dosage Form >BLA >Approval Date >Patent No. >Expiredate

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.