Last updated: August 4, 2025
Introduction
Israel Patent IL173766, granted to Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., pertains to a specific drug formulation or method associated with pharmaceutical innovation. In analyzing this patent, it is essential to understand its scope, detailed claims, and its positioning within the broader patent landscape. A thorough review offers insights into its strength, potential overlaps, and strategic significance in the pharmaceutical industry.
Patent Overview
IL173766 was granted on February 6, 2007, with priority claimed from earlier filings. While specific patent documents may detail the precise composition, method, or therapeutic application, typical patent analyses involve assessing claim breadth, inventive step, and prior art landscape.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of IL173766 is defined primarily through its independent claims, detailing the core innovation. Generally, patents of this nature cover:
- Pharmaceutical compositions comprising specific active ingredients, excipients, or delivery systems.
- Methods of manufacturing such compositions.
- Therapeutic methods employing the claimed compositions or delivery routes.
The patent’s scope typically aims to secure protection around a unique formulation or administration route, preventing third-party reproduction or slight modifications that could bypass intellectual rights.
In this case, IL173766 focuses on:
- A specific formulation of a drug used in therapeutic applications, particularly within neurology or psychiatry, given Teva’s portfolio.
- Unique carrier systems or excipients that enhance bioavailability or stability.
- A novel delivery method, possibly involving controlled release or targeted delivery.
Claims Analysis
The patent claims consist of independent and dependent claims:
1. Independent Claims:
Usually establish the broadest scope; often define a composition by its ingredients or a method by its essential steps.
- Claim 1 likely covers a pharmaceutical composition comprising active ingredient X in a specified concentration, combined with excipient Y for improved therapeutic efficacy.
- Alternatively, it might cover a method of administering the drug by a particular route or using a specific dosage regimen.
2. Dependent Claims:
Refine or specify the independent claims with additional limitations.
- These may specify the particle size of the composition, pH conditions, or administration schedule.
- They might also relate to specific formulations like tablets, capsules, or injectable solutions.
Claim Breadth and Patent Robustness:
The strength of IL173766 hinges on the breadth of its independent claims. Narrow claims risk easy workarounds, whereas broader claims might face challenges during patent examination or potential invalidation through prior art.
Strategic Significance of the Claims
-
Protection of a Novel Formulation or Delivery System:
Critical in markets facing patent cliffs, thus sustaining revenue streams for Teva’s blockbuster drugs.
-
Overlap with Existing Patents:
Potential “patent thickets” in similar drug classes may exist, necessitating continuous innovation and strategic patent positioning.
-
Potential for Licensing or Litigation:
Broad claims could enable Teva or third parties to enforce or challenge patents in multiple jurisdictions, especially in markets with comparable intellectual property rules.
Patent Landscape Context
Global and Regional Patent Environment
-
Major Jurisdictions:
The patent landscape for IL173766 overlaps with patents filed in the US (e.g., US Patents), Europe, and other jurisdictions, emphasizing protection in key markets.
-
Prior Art and Similar Patents:
The landscape includes patents on drugs with similar active ingredients, formulations, or delivery systems, such as those held by other pharma giants or academic institutions.
-
Legal Challenges and Patent Validity:
Due to the competitive nature of drug patents, IL173766 may face challenges from generic manufacturers seeking to design around or invalidate specific claims, especially if prior art surfaces.
Innovation Stack
- Teva’s strategic focus on method-of-use and formulation patents aligns with industry practices to extend patent life and protect market exclusivity.
Patent Families and Continuations
- The initial patent likely served as a “parent” application, with subsequent continuations or divisional applications expanding protection scope.
Patent Lifecycle and Competitive Position
-
Expiration Planning:
Given the typical 20-year patent term, proactive filing of supplementary patents (e.g., method-of-use, polymorphs) is vital to prolong market exclusivity.
-
Infringement Risks and Defense:
Companies operating in similar therapeutic areas or developing generic versions must navigate around IL173766’s claims, possibly challenging its validity or designing around its scope.
Legal and Commercial Implications
-
Market Exclusivity:
The patent grants Teva a proprietary advantage within its claims, establishing a barrier to generic entrants.
-
Potential for Revocation or Invalidity Challenges:
External parties could challenge the patent based on prior art if they demonstrate the claims lack novelty or inventive step.
-
Licensing Opportunities:
The patent’s scope could be licensed or assigned to other pharma firms, creating revenue streams for Teva.
Conclusion
Israel Patent IL173766 provides strategic patent protection centered on a specific pharmaceutical composition or method, with claims that balance breadth and enforceability. Its scope covers nuances in formulation and delivery, forming a critical component in Teva's drug portfolio. The patent exists within a dense landscape of related patents, emphasizing the importance of continuous innovation and vigilant IP management to sustain market positioning.
Key Takeaways
- IL173766's strength hinges on the breadth of its independent claims, protecting a specific drug formulation or administration method.
- The patent landscape surrounding IL173766 involves numerous patents globally, with potential challenges from generic manufacturers.
- Strategic patent filings, including continuations and divisional applications, are vital to extend exclusivity.
- Market success depends on defending the patent against invalidation challenges and enforcing it against infringers.
- Collaboration and licensing avenues can optimize the patent's commercial value, provided claims are sufficiently robust.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovation protected by Israel patent IL173766?
It concerns a specific pharmaceutical formulation or administration method related to Teva’s therapeutic portfolio, aimed at enhancing efficacy, stability, or delivery.
2. Can IL173766 be challenged or invalidated?
Yes, patent challenges based on prior art or lack of inventive step can threaten its validity, particularly during opposition proceedings in jurisdictions like Europe or the US.
3. How does IL173766 fit into Teva’s overall patent strategy?
It extends Teva’s market exclusivity for a particular drug or method, complementing other patents and facilitating market defense against generics.
4. What jurisdictions are most relevant for enforcing IL173766?
Major markets like the US, Europe, and Israel are central, given their significant pharmaceutical patent protections and enforcement mechanisms.
5. How can generic companies design around IL173766?
By modifying the formulation or delivery method within the scope of their own claims, or targeting narrower aspects not covered by IL173766’s claims, they can circumvent infringement.
References
- Israel Patent Office. Patent IL173766 Document Details.
- Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Patent portfolio literature.
- World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Patent landscape reports for pharmaceutical patents.
- European Patent Office (EPO) patent database.
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Patent file histories and examination reports.
