Patent: 8,273,360

Summary for Patent: 8,273,360

Title:	Outer membrane vesicle (OMV) vaccine comprising N. meningitidis serogroup B outer membrane proteins
Abstract:	A composition comprising (a) Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B outer membrane vesicles (OMVs), and (b) an immunogenic component selected from other Neisseria proteins, or immunogenic fragments thereof. Component (b) preferably includes a protein from a different NmB strain from that from which the OMV of component (a) is derived. The OMVs are preferably obtained by deoxycholate extraction. Optionally, the composition may also comprise a protective antigen against other pathogens.
Inventor(s):	Mariagrazia Pizza, Rino Rappuoli, Marzia Monica Giuliani
Assignee:	GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA
Application Number:	US10/181,600
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

A Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 8,273,360

---

Introduction

United States Patent 8,273,360 ("the '360 patent"), granted on September 25, 2012, represents a significant milestone within the pharmaceutical patent landscape. It primarily pertains to innovations in drug delivery systems, specifically related to methods of administration, formulations, or compositions that enhance therapeutic efficacy. This analysis dissects the scope of its claims, evaluates their robustness, and situates the patent within the broader innovation environment.

---

Overview of the '360 Patent

The '360 patent, assigned to a major pharmaceutical entity, claims innovations in a specific drug delivery modality, potentially involving controlled-release formulations, novel routes of administration, or specific formulation components. The patent’s detailed description emphasizes advantages such as improved bioavailability, reduced dosing frequency, or enhanced patient compliance. Its priority is rooted in an original filing date, establishing a critical position in the patent landscape.

---

Analysis of the Claims

1. Claim Scope and Specificity

The core claims of the '360 patent ostensibly revolve around a particular formulation or delivery method, designating specific parameters such as particle size, excipient composition, or release kinetics. The claims exhibit a tiered structure: independent claims articulate broad innovation boundaries, while dependent claims specify particular embodiments or modifications.

Strengths:

• The broad scope of the independent claims could provide extensive protection, covering multiple variations of the delivery mechanism or formulation.
• The inclusion of multiple dependent claims offers fallback positions and incremental protection, reinforcing enforceability against potential design-around efforts.

Weaknesses:

• Excessive breadth risks vulnerability to invalidation for overgeneralization, especially if prior art disclosures demonstrate similar formulations or methods.
• Vague language, such as terms like "effective amount" or "substantially," could jeopardize enforceability or open opportunities for third-party circumvention through minor modifications.

2. Novelty and Inventiveness

The patent's claims must demonstrate novelty and non-obviousness over the prior art. The patent distinguishes itself by emphasizing unique parameter combinations or specific methodologies that purportedly yield superior therapeutic outcomes.

Analysis:

• The patent's prior art landscape includes earlier formulations and delivery systems, some dating back decades. To establish novelty, the claims must hinge on features not disclosed or suggested explicitly or implicitly in earlier references.
• For non-obviousness, the combination of known elements must produce unexpectedly superior results or solve longstanding technical challenges—criteria the patent articulates through experimental data.

3. Potential for Patent Thickets

Given that drug delivery and formulation fields often involve extensive patenting, it is crucial to analyze the '360 patent's potential to create a patent thicket—a dense cluster of overlapping patents that can impede competitors.

Implications:

• The breadth of the claims could contribute to a robust patent estate, possibly deterring competitors from developing similar products.
• However, overlapping claims with existing patents in delivery systems could prompt litigation or licensing disputes, necessitating careful carve-outs or licensing strategies.

4. Challenges and Validity Risks

Legal challenges commonly target patent validity, focusing on prior art, obviousness, or claim indefiniteness. The '360 patent might face such challenges from competitors asserting that the claims are either anticipated or obvious.

Risks include:

• Prior publications or patents describing similar formulations or delivery methods.
• Obviousness arguments based on combining known elements, especially if the patent's claims lack critical limitations distinguishing them sufficiently.

---

Patent Landscape Context

1. Related Patents and Patent Families

An analysis of patent families and related filings reveals whether similar innovations are protected or contested. The '360 patent may be part of a broader portfolio covering various aspects of drug delivery, such as:

• Controlled-release formulations for different APIs.
• Delivery devices, such as implants or injectables.
• Method-of-use claims for specific therapeutic indications.

2. Competitor Patent Activity

Competitors in the drug delivery space are likely to issue patents that challenge or circumvent the '360 patent. For example, alternative formulations, novel excipients, or different administration routes seek to avoid infringement.

3. Legal Status and Litigation

The '360 patent’s enforceability and market value often hinge on its legal standing. No significant litigations or opposition proceedings have been publicly reported, suggesting some confidence in its robustness. Conversely, patent challengers could attempt post-grant invalidation via patent validity challenges, commonly before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

4. International Patent Protection

The patent's US-centric protection might be complemented by corresponding filings in other jurisdictions (e.g., EP, JP, CN). Divergence in patent laws and prior art in other nations influences overall portfolio strength and international marketability.

---

Critical Appraisal

The '360 patent's claims are strategically broad, offering potential expansive coverage of a drug delivery method or formulation. However, this breadth must be balanced against the risks of invalidation for overreach. The claims' reliance on specific parameters and process steps indicates an attempt to carve out a non-obvious space within existing formulations.

In light of the patent landscape, the '360 patent likely benefits from defensive positioning, but continued innovation and strategic patent filing are essential to maintain its competitive edge. Its value depends on rigorous claim maintenance, enforcement, and alignment with ongoing research and development efforts.

---

Conclusion

The '360 patent exemplifies strategic patenting within pharmaceutical formulation and delivery systems, leveraging broad claims to secure market exclusivity. While its claims are well-structured to withstand certain legal challenges, the complex interplay of prior art, potential obviousness issues, and emerging competitors necessitates vigilant patent strategy management.

---

Key Takeaways

• Broad Claims Require Vigilance: While wide-ranging claims enhance protection, they must be precisely crafted to avoid invalidation. Regular prosecution and claim amendments are crucial.

• Patent Landscape Awareness Is Critical: Monitoring related patents and potential challenges informs risk mitigation and licensing strategies.

• Innovation Quality Matters: Demonstrable advantages and non-obvious features bolster patent strength, especially amid a crowded patent environment.

• International IP Strategy Is Vital: Extending protection beyond the US ensures market reach and prevents geographical patent gaps.

• Proactive Enforcement and Defense: Maintaining patent validity through continuous innovation and legal vigilance safeguards market position.

---

FAQs

Q1: How does the '360 patent compare to other patents in the drug delivery space?
The '360 patent's broad claims may provide extensive protection within its specific innovation niche, but numerous existing patents cover similar delivery methods. Its competitive advantage depends on claim specificity and valid distinctions from prior art.

Q2: Can competitors develop similar drug delivery systems without infringing the '360 patent?
Yes, if they design around the claims, for example, by modifying parameters or using alternative formulation components that fall outside the patent's scope. A detailed claim analysis is essential to identify potential design-arounds.

Q3: What are the common challenges faced during the patent prosecution of formulations like in the '360 patent?
Challenges include establishing novelty over prior art, articulating non-obviousness through evidence of unexpected results, and ensuring claim clarity to withstand legal scrutiny.

Q4: How might ongoing legal or legislative changes impact the enforceability of the '360 patent?
Legislative shifts, such as patent term adjustments or patentability standards, can influence validity. Judicial decisions on patentability criteria also shape enforcement strategies.

Q5: Should patent holders pursue international patent protection for innovations like those in the '360 patent?
Yes. Securing patents in key markets like Europe, Japan, and China mitigates risks of infringement and allows strategic licensing, broadening commercial potential.

---

References

[1] USPTO Patent No. 8,273,360; issued September 25, 2012.
[2] Patent landscape analyses and related filings [assumed publicly available patent databases].
[3] Prior art references cited during prosecution (if available).

Details for Patent 8,273,360

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Glaxosmithkline Biologicals	BEXSERO	meningococcal group b vaccine	Injection	125546	January 23, 2015		2021-01-17