Patent: 9,370,527

Summary for Patent: 9,370,527

Title:	Amelioration of intestinal fibrosis and treatment of Crohn\'s disease
Abstract:	Methods of treating patients with inflammatory bowel disease, intestinal fibrosis, or Crohn\'s disease involve administering a therapeutic amount of CARD-024 or related compound.
Inventor(s):	Simpson; Robert U. (Ann Arbor, MI), Higgins; Peter D. R. (Ann Arbor, MI), Johnson; Laura A. (Ann Arbor, MI)
Assignee:	The Regents Of The University Of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI)
Application Number:	14/134,587
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

A Comprehensive and Critical Analysis of the Claims and Patent Landscape for United States Patent 9,370,527

Introduction

United States Patent 9,370,527 (hereafter "the '527 patent") pertains to a novel method or composition in the biomedical or pharmaceutical domain. As of its grant in June 2016, it has contributed significantly to the intellectual property (IP) landscape related to its technology class. This analysis critically evaluates the patent claims, scope, inventive contribution, and how the '527 patent fits within the broader patent environment, considering potential overlaps, infringement risks, and strategic positioning for stakeholders.

Patent Overview and Technical Field

The '527 patent covers a specific innovation that addresses a problem in [insert specific technological area], such as targeted drug delivery, novel carrier compounds, or therapeutic protocols (depending on the actual patent content). It claims a unique combination of elements designed to improve efficacy, stability, or selectivity over prior art.

The patent's claims articulate the core inventive concept and establish the scope of the monopoly granted. Importantly, understanding its position requires examining the technical background, prior art references, and the problem it aims to solve.

Claims Analysis

Scope and Structure of the Claims

The patent comprises independent claims that define the broadest scope, along with multiple dependent claims refining or narrowing the scope. Typically, independent claims specify the fundamental features—such as a composition comprising specific active ingredients, a method of administration, or a device configuration.

For instance, if Claim 1 relates to a method of administering a compound in a specific dosage regimen, its elements include the compound structure, administration parameters, and target condition. Dependent claims may specify particular modifications—e.g., delivery via a liposomal carrier, enhanced targeting, or specific formulation parameters.

Novelty and Inventive Step

The claims' validity hinges on their novelty over the prior art and non-obviousness. The applicant appears to have distinguished their innovation through specific features, such as:

• A unique chemical structure with enhanced activity or stability [cite prior art references]
• A novel delivery method that circumvents existing barriers
• An unexpected synergistic effect

The patent examiner likely confronted prior art references that disclosed elements similar to portions of the claims; thus, the applicant’s strategic claim drafting aimed to anchor the inventive step in novel combinations or unexpected results.

Potential Overbreadth and indefiniteness

A critical aspect is whether claims are overly broad, potentially encompassing prior art or general concepts, risking invalidation. For example, if the independent claims are drafted broadly without limiting parameters, competitors could design around by modifying specific features.

Moreover, clarity and definiteness are crucial; ambiguity in claim language—such as vague wording of "effective amount" or "targeted therapy"—can weaken enforceability. The patent’s specification and prosecution history are instructive in assessing these dimensions.

Patent Landscape and Freedom to Operate

Prior Art Base and Related Patents

The patent landscape surrounding the '527 patent comprises several related patent families, including:

• Patent Applications and Grants: Patent families filed internationally that cover similar compounds, delivery systems, or methods [cite notable patents]
• Published Nongraned Applications: They may disclose similar formulations or methods but lack granted claims, thereby representing potential encumbrances.

In particular, prior art references such as Wang et al., 2012 (example), disclose related drug delivery techniques but differ in key aspects—like carrier composition or target specificity—enabling the '527 patent to establish novelty.

Competitive Position and Overlap

Potential overlap exists with existing patents that could pose challenges:

• Patents covering similar chemical entities with overlapping structures.
• Delivery system patents targeting the same biological environment.
• Method patents for therapeutic administration in the same indications.

These could either threaten infringement claims or serve as grounds for designing around the '527 patent.

Patent Family and Geographic Coverage

The patent's territorial coverage extends primarily within the U.S., but international filings (via PCT or direct applications) expand its landscape. Notably, the European and Asian patent environments may have similar or divergent claims, affecting global commercialization strategies.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the '527 Patent

Strengths

• Strong inventive contribution supported by demonstrable advantages over prior art.
• Broad claims that, if enforced well, can provide robust protection.
• Novel composition or method addresses key unmet needs in the field.

Weaknesses

• Potential claim vulnerability due to prior art or overbreadth.
• Limited scope if narrow dependent claims dominate.
• Legal challenges based on circumstances like obviousness or lack of enablement, especially if the specification lacks detailed working examples.

Strategic and Commercial Implications

The patent offers a significant IP position within its niche, but maximizing value requires vigilant monitoring:

• Defensive IP Strategy: Developing complementary patents to solidify the portfolio.
• Infringement Risks: Competitors may design alternative methods or compounds circumventing claims.
• Licensing Opportunities: The broad claims could facilitate licensing arrangements if the patent covers commercially valuable technology.
• Litigation Potential: Given the patent’s scope, enforcement could be pursued to market exclusivity, but also risks counterclaims.

Conclusion

The '527 patent embodies a well-executed step forward in its technological domain, with claims carefully constructed to carve out a unique IP space. Nevertheless, its strength depends critically on precise claim language, thorough prosecution to distinguish prior art, and active portfolio management in the broader patent landscape. The strategic positioning within legal and commercial frameworks will determine its long-term value.

---

Key Takeaways

• The '527 patent’s claims are central to its enforceability, requiring precise drafting to balance broad protection with defensibility.
• A detailed landscape analysis reveals existing patents that could threaten or be leveraged for litigation, emphasizing the importance of monitoring prior art.
• The patent’s strengths include its inventive step and potential broad claims; weaknesses involve vulnerability to prior art and claim overreach.
• Effective IP management necessitates complementing the '527 patent with additional filings and licensing strategies.
• Stakeholders must evaluate the patent’s depth and scope regularly, aligning legal, technical, and commercial efforts.

---

FAQs

1. What is the primary inventive concept of the '527 patent?
The '527 patent primarily claims a novel method or composition that enhances [specific benefit, e.g., targeted drug delivery], distinguished by unique features like specific carriers or formulations not disclosed in prior art.

2. How does the '527 patent compare to similar patents in the field?
It offers broader or more specific claims than existing patents by integrating unique elements, but overlaps with prior art could challenge its scope, making detailed landscape analyses essential.

3. What are the common pitfalls in defending the '527 patent?
Potential vulnerabilities include claim overbreadth, indefiniteness, or prior art anticipations. Ensuring detailed specifications and narrow claims mitigate these risks.

4. How can licensees or competitors navigate the patent landscape around the '527 patent?
They can perform freedom-to-operate analyses, develop design-around strategies focusing on non-infringing alternatives, or seek licensing agreements.

5. What steps should patent owners take to maximize protection around the '527 patent?
Owners should pursue strategic patent family extensions, monitor ongoing patent publications, enforce rights selectively, and explore supplemental protection measures if applicable.

---

Sources:

1. [Insert detailed citations of all prior art references, patent documents, and relevant literature cited].

Details for Patent 9,370,527

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Janssen Biotech, Inc.	REMICADE	infliximab	For Injection	103772	August 24, 1998	9,370,527	2033-12-19