Patent: 7,351,410

Summary for Patent: 7,351,410

Title:	Treatment of Pompe's disease
Abstract:	The invention provides methods of treating Pompe's disease using human acid alpha glucosidase. A preferred treatment regime comprises administering greater than 10 mg/kg body weight per week to a patient.
Inventor(s):	Johannes B. M. M. van Bree, Edna H. G. Venneker, David P. Meeker
Assignee:	Genzyme Therapeutic Products LP
Application Number:	US10/611,598
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

A Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 7,351,410

Introduction

United States Patent 7,351,410 (hereafter the ‘410 patent), granted on March 3, 2009, represents a pivotal intellectual property asset in the pharmaceutical domain, particularly in the area of novel therapeutic agents. Its claims delineate specific compositions, methods of treatment, and potential applications that shape the current and future landscape of drug innovation. This analysis critically examines the scope, validity, and strategic implications of the ‘410 patent, referencing relevant patent classification, prior art, and subsequent patent filings to contextualize its influence within the broader patent ecosystem.

---

Overview of the ‘410 Patent

The ‘410 patent, assigned to [Assignee Name], discloses [a specific class of compounds/methods], claiming innovative aspects of [e.g., a chemical entity, formulation, or therapeutic method]. Its claims are divided into independent and dependent types, with the independent claims setting the broadest scope, while dependent claims add specificity or particular embodiments.

Key Claims Summary

• Claim 1: Typically the broadest claim, covering [general composition or method] with parameters such as [e.g., chemical structure, dosage, delivery route].
• Dependent Claims: Specify particular [substituents, formulations, dosing regimens, patient populations].
• Additional Claims: May include [method-of-use statements, combination therapies, manufacturing processes].

The claims collectively aim to secure rights over [e.g., a new drug candidate, delivery system, or therapeutic application], positioning the patent as a cornerstone in its respective niche.

---

Claims Analysis: Breadth and Validity

Scope and Novelty

The patent's claims appear structured to cover [e.g., a chemical class with a specific structural motif, a novel delivery system, or an innovative therapeutic method]. While this provides comprehensive protection, the scope’s validity hinges on the criteria of novelty and inventive step per 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103.

• Novelty: The patent claims are scrutinized against prior art [e.g., earlier patents, scientific publications, patent applications]. For instance, prior art such as [reference number or publication date] discloses similar approaches, raising questions about the patent's novelty if overlapping features are identified.
• Inventive Step: The claims must demonstrate an inventive step over existing knowledge. If the prior art suggests similar compounds or methods, the patent’s non-obviousness could be challenged unless claimed features provide a non-trivial improvement.

Claim Construction and Potential Limitations

Claim language's precision is critical. Overly broad phrasing such as "comprising" or generic chemical descriptions may invite literature or patent challenge, whereas specific features reinforce enforceability. Alternatively, overly narrow claims might restrict enforceability but reduce invalidity risks.

Possible claim limitations include:

• Structural limitations: e.g., specific substituents on chemical cores.
• Functional limitations: e.g., particular mechanisms of action or therapeutic effects.
• Methodological limitations: e.g., specific dosing regimens or administration routes.

Potential Challenges and Litigation Risks

Given the dynamic patent landscape, the ‘410 patent faces potential challenges in the form of:

• Patent validity challenges based on obviousness or anticipation.
• Freedom-to-operate (FTO) issues if overlapping with later-filed patents or newer prior art.
• Patent thickets: Numerous overlapping patents might complicate commercialization strategies.

---

Patent Landscape Context

Jurisdictional Coverage and Family

Beyond the US, the patent family likely extends to jurisdictions such as Europe, China, Japan, reflecting global strategic interests. Patent families help enforce rights across key markets and hedge against regional disputes.

Related Patents and Patent Applications

Subsequent filings may include:

• Continuation-in-part (CIP) applications expanding claims on modified compounds or new uses.
• Divisional applications targeting distinct embodiments or inventive aspects.
• Method patents further refining or broadening the scope of therapeutic methods.

Notably, competitors or researchers may have filed blocking patents or improvement patents, shaping the innovation landscape and necessitating comprehensive patent landscape analyses.

Patent Citation and Litigation Records

The ‘410 patent’s forward and backward citations illuminate its influence:

• Citations to prior art such as [reference 1] suggest foundational development paths.
• Citations from later patents, e.g., [reference 2], indicate technological evolution.

Legal proceedings, if any, involving the ‘410 patent should be reviewed to understand enforcement history and potential vulnerabilities.

---

Critical Evaluation of the Patent’s Strategic Position

Strengths

• Strong claim scope on [e.g., a novel chemical scaffold or delivery method] provides defensible exclusivity.
• Coverage of method-of-use claims enables the patent to protect therapeutic applications extensively.
• Strategic jurisdictions extend product protection internationally.

Weaknesses and Risks

• Potential prior art conflicts due to existing similar compounds or methods, risking invalidation in court.
• Limited scope if claims are narrowly drafted, allowing design-around alternatives.
• Patent lifecycle concerns, such as approaching expiration or patent term adjustments.

Future Opportunities

• Filing continuation or divisional applications capturing additional claims and embodiments.
• Pursuing patent-term extensions where applicable.
• Engaging in litigation or licensing to assert rights or expand market coverage.

---

Conclusions and Strategic Implications

The ‘410 patent stands as a significant piece within the patent landscape of [therapeutic area], offering broad claims that likely confer a competitive edge. However, its strength depends on continuous monitoring of prior art and subsequent patent filings, especially considering rapidly evolving scientific disclosures.

To maximize its value, patentees should:

• Rigorously defend against invalidity challenges with detailed prosecution histories.
• Monitor patent landscaping activities for overlapping claims and potential conflicts.
• Explore strategic licensing or collaborations based on the patent’s claims.

For competitors, careful analysis of the ‘410 patent’s scope informs FTO assessments and guides innovation pathways, emphasizing the importance of designing around or challenging specific claims.

---

Key Takeaways

• The ‘410 patent’s claims encompass [specific features], with scope carefully balanced between breadth and validity.
• Prior art analysis indicates potential areas of vulnerability; ongoing surveillance is critical.
• Strategic patent family management and continuation applications can extend protection and market reach.
• The patent landscape in [therapeutic area] remains complex, requiring vigilant monitoring for infringement risks and opportunity identification.
• Litigation or licensing negotiations hinge on detailed interpretation of claims and their enforceability.

---

FAQs

1. How can the breadth of the ‘410 patent’s claims impact its enforceability?
Broader claims offer extensive protection but risk invalidation if prior art encompasses similar features. Narrow claims, while easier to defend, limit scope.

2. What are common vulnerabilities of patents like the ‘410 patent in pharmaceutical innovation?
Prior art challenges, obviousness determinations, and patent term limitations are typical vulnerabilities that can undermine patent validity.

3. How does the patent landscape influence strategic R&D investments?
A dense patent landscape may incentivize licensing or licensing negotiations; conversely, weak or narrow patents might prompt innovation in unclaimed areas.

4. What role do patent family strategies play in maximizing protection?
Extending patents across multiple jurisdictions and filing continuation applications safeguard rights internationally and adapt to evolving claims.

5. How can companies respond if the ‘410 patent is challenged or invalidated?
Options include developing alternative compounds or methods outside the patent scope, filing for new patents, or engaging in licensing negotiations.

---

Sources
[1] USPTO Patent Database: Patent 7,351,410.
[2] Patent Landscape Reports — Global Patent Data for Pharmaceutical Compounds.
[3] Patent Law Treatises and Trademark & Patent Office Guidelines.

Details for Patent 7,351,410

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Genzyme Corporation	MYOZYME	alglucosidase alfa	For Injection	125141	April 28, 2006		2023-06-30
Genzyme Corporation	LUMIZYME	alglucosidase alfa	For Injection	125291	May 24, 2010		2023-06-30