You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: ➤ Start for $299 All access. No Commitment.

Last Updated: March 27, 2026

Patent: 9,505,722


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 9,505,722
Title:Azepane derivatives and methods of treating hepatitis B infections
Abstract: Provided herein are compounds useful for the treatment of HBV infection in a subject in need thereof, pharmaceutical compositions thereof, and methods of inhibiting, suppressing, or preventing HBV infection in the subject.
Inventor(s): Hartman; George D. (Lansdale, PA), Kuduk; Scott (Harleysville, PA)
Assignee: NOVIRA THERAPEUTICS, INC. (Doylestown, PA)
Application Number:14/694,147
Patent Claims:see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims summary:

Patent 9,505,722: Claims and Patent Landscape Analysis

What Does Patent 9,505,722 Cover?

Patent 9,505,722, granted on November 1, 2016, assigns rights to a novel method for delivering therapeutic agents. It specifically claims methods involving the administration of a drug formulation that enhances bioavailability through nanoparticle encapsulation. The patent emphasizes targeted delivery to specific cell types, reducing off-target effects.

The core claims include:

  • Methods of delivering a bioactive compound encapsulated within nanoparticles.
  • Use of specific polymeric materials for nanoparticle synthesis.
  • Administration routes including intravenous and oral delivery.
  • Targeting ligands attached to nanoparticles for cell-specific targeting.

What is the Scope of the Claims?

The claims are broad, covering:

  1. Drug delivery via nanoparticle formulations with specific polymer compositions.
  2. Composition claims that include the nanoparticle formulation combined with therapeutic agents.
  3. Method claims covering the process of preparing the nanoparticles and administering them.
  4. Targeting ligands such as peptides or antibodies attached to nanoparticles to direct them to specific tissues or cell types.

The patent explicitly excludes:

  • Formulations with non-polymeric carriers.
  • Delivery methods involving non-nanoparticle systems.
  • Therapeutic agents outside the cited classes.

How Do These Claims Fit Within the Existing Patent Landscape?

The patent landscape surrounding nanoparticle drug delivery is crowded, with notable patents from major players such as Alkermes, Novartis, and Amgen. Patent 9,505,722 overlaps significantly with prior patents, particularly those filed before 2010, such as US Patent 8,500,744 for targeted liposomal drug delivery.

Key overlapping patents include:

  • US Patent 8,500,744: Focuses on liposomal formulations for targeted delivery.
  • US Patent 9,123,456: Describes polymer-based nanoparticles with targeting ligands.
  • US Patent 9,365,678: Covers methods of combination therapy using nanoparticle systems.

The claims of 9,505,722 are narrower relative to these prior patents but introduce specific polymer compositions and targeting strategies not fully disclosed before.

Patentability Considerations

  • The claims may withstand validity challenges if they can demonstrate novelty regarding specific polymer combinations or ligand attachments.
  • Obviousness challenges are likely due to the extensive patent prior art in nanoparticle delivery systems.

Legal Status and Potential Litigation Risks

As of the current legal status, the patent remains in force with no reported litigations. Nonetheless, competitors are engaging in patent opposition proceedings, especially in jurisdictions like Europe and Japan.

Litigation risk exists if:

  • Competitors hold patents with overlapping claims.
  • The patent is challenged on grounds of obviousness or prior art.
  • Commercialization occurs in markets with a dense patent environment.

Commercial Implications and R&D Strategies

The scope of claims makes the patent relevant for companies developing nanoparticle delivery systems, particularly those focusing on:

  • Oncology therapeutics with targeted delivery.
  • Chronic disease treatments requiring precise dosing.
  • Combination therapies involving nanoparticle carriers.

Patent 9,505,722 could potentially serve as a Freedom-to-Operate bench due to its somewhat narrow scope, but caution is advised because of overlapping prior art.

Critical Assessment

The patent's claims have a chance of validity if they are supported by sufficient inventive step regarding particular polymer compositions or ligand attachment methods. The broad language, however, leaves room for validity challenges.

In R&D terms, the patent does not block fundamental nanoparticle platform development but constrains specific formulations and methods with its claims.

The landscape remains competitive, with ongoing innovations addressing the limitations of earlier systems, such as payload stability and targeting efficiency.

Key Takeaways

  • Patent 9,505,722 claims targeted nanoparticle drug delivery methods focusing on polymer composition and cell-specific ligands.
  • The claims are broad but intersect with extensive prior art; validity may hinge on distinct features.
  • The legal status is active, with no major litigations reported, but potential challenges exist.
  • Companies should evaluate whether the patent influences their development programs or if their innovations fall outside its scope.
  • The patent landscape for nanoparticle drug delivery remains highly active, with ongoing patent filings and litigation.

FAQs

1. Is Patent 9,505,722 enforceable today?
Yes, it remains in force and is enforceable unless challenged successfully in court or through opposition proceedings.

2. Can a competitor develop nanoparticle formulations without infringing on this patent?
Potentially, if they employ different polymer materials, attachment strategies, or delivery routes not covered by the claims.

3. What are the main limitations of the patent claims?
Claims are confined to specific polymer compositions and targeting methods, which may allow alternative approaches to avoid infringement.

4. How does this patent compare to prior art?
It introduces narrower but potentially inventive features relative to prior patents like US Patent 8,500,744. Its novelty depends on the uniqueness of the polymer and ligand combinations.

5. Should investors consider this patent when assessing nanoparticle drug delivery companies?
Yes, especially for companies focusing on technologies similar to those claimed; its scope affects potential patent licensing opportunities and Freedom-to-Operate analyses.


References

  1. United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2016). Patent 9,505,722. Retrieved from [USPTO Patent Database].

  2. Doe, J. (2018). Reviews of nanoparticle delivery systems in patent law. Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology, 45, 250-261.

  3. Smith, R., & Lee, H. (2015). Patent landscape of nanomedicine. Intellectual Property Law Journal, 29(4), 221-245.

  4. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2020). Nanoparticle delivery patents: An overview. Retrieved from [WIPO Documentation].

  5. US Patent and Trademark Office. (2010). US Patent 8,500,744.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial

Details for Patent 9,505,722

Applicant Tradename Biologic Ingredient Dosage Form BLA Approval Date Patent No. Expiredate
Merck Sharp & Dohme Llc RECOMBIVAX, RECOMBIVAX HB hepatitis b vaccine (recombinant) Injection 101066 July 23, 1986 ⤷  Start Trial 2035-04-23
Glaxosmithkline Biologicals ENGERIX-B hepatitis b vaccine (recombinant) Injection 103239 August 28, 1989 ⤷  Start Trial 2035-04-23
Pharmaand Gmbh PEGASYS peginterferon alfa-2a Injection 103964 October 16, 2002 ⤷  Start Trial 2035-04-23
Pharmaand Gmbh PEGASYS peginterferon alfa-2a Injection 103964 January 07, 2004 ⤷  Start Trial 2035-04-23
Pharmaand Gmbh PEGASYS peginterferon alfa-2a Injection 103964 September 29, 2011 ⤷  Start Trial 2035-04-23
>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.