|
Patent landscape, scope, and claims: |
United States Patent 11,541,034: Scope, Claims, and U.S. Landscape for Co-administration of a Stereodefined Coronavirus-Care Compound With Ritonavir
United States Patent 11,541,034 is a use patent built around a single stereodefined small molecule (defined by a long structural name), used in a coronavirus treatment method through co-administration with ritonavir, with systematic claim coverage for route (oral), dose ranges, twice-daily schedules, and solid-state form and characterization methods (P-XRD peaks, solid-state NMR peaks), plus salt/solvate/hydrate variants. Claim set also carves out SARS-CoV-2-specific embodiments.
What is claimed at a high level?
Core inventive concept
The independent claim is directed to:
- Method of treating a coronavirus infection in a patient
- By co-administering:
- A therapeutically effective amount of a specific compound with the defined stereochemistry:
- (1R,2S,5S)-N-{(1S)-1-Cyano-2-[(3S)-2-oxopyrrolidin-3-yl]ethyl}-6,6-dimethyl-3-[3-methyl-N-(trifluoroacetyl)-L-valyl]-3-azabicyclo[3.1.0]hexane-2-carboxamide
- plus ritonavir
- With additional qualifiers that the compound may be a solvate or hydrate (and dependent claims further specify crystalline/amorphous forms, including specific solvates like methyl tert-butyl ether).
Tight claim architecture (coverage layers)
The claim stack is layered in a way that blocks common “design-around” moves:
- Condition scope: “coronavirus infection” broadly, with later dependent claims narrowing to SARS-CoV-2.
- Combination scope: requires ritonavir as a co-administered component.
- Molecule scope: requires the exact stereodefined compound (and enumerated forms).
- Form scope: permits crystalline, amorphous, solvate, hydrate variants, then specifies solid form IDs and characterization fingerprints.
- Administration scope: covers oral dosing.
- Dose and schedule scope: provides dose ranges and specific preferred “twice daily” regimen at specific dosage levels.
- Form-specific fingerprints:
- P-XRD peak lists with ±0.2° 2θ tolerance for multiple “solid form” variants (Solid Form 1, 4, 2, etc.)
- solid-state 19F NMR and 13C NMR chemical shifts for additional identifiers.
What do the independent and dependent claims cover?
Independent claim
Claim 1 (method-of-treatment + mandatory ritonavir co-administration)
- Treating a coronavirus infection
- Co-administering:
- the specified stereodefined compound (or solvate/hydrate)
- and ritonavir
- No restriction to route, dose, or form in Claim 1 beyond the “solvate/hydrate” option.
Dependent claim set (selected structural summary)
Below is the functional coverage from the dependent claims you provided.
Route and dosing scope
- Claim 2: co-administered orally (compound + ritonavir).
- Claim 3: daily dose ranges:
- compound: ~10 mg to ~1500 mg/day
- ritonavir: ~10 mg to ~1000 mg/day
- Claim 4: preferred discrete compound single-dose levels, with a twice-a-day regimen:
- compound per dose: ~100, 150, 200, …, 750 mg
- schedule: twice a day
- Claim 5: ritonavir also twice a day
- Claim 6: a concrete example:
- ~300 mg compound + ~100 mg ritonavir, twice daily
Solid-state form scope (compound form variants)
- Claim 7: crystalline compound is used.
- Claim 8: crystalline compound described as Solid Form 1
- characterized by P-XRD peaks at:
- 7.6, 9.8, 11.4, 11.9, 12.7, 15.7, 15.8, 17.3, 17.8, 18.3, 18.9, 19.7, 19.9, 20.5, 21.0, 21.7, 22.2, 22.5, 23.1, 23.6, 24.7, 25.3, 27.0, 27.2, 27.9, 28.1, 29.5, 32.6, 35.7, 37.0 degrees 2θ
- with each peak ±0.2° 2θ
- Claim 9: crystalline compound characterized with:
- 19F NMR: -73.3 ±0.1 ppm
- 13C NMR: 31.0 ±0.1 ppm, 27.9 ±0.1 ppm, 178.9 ±0.2 ppm
- Claim 10: crystalline compound described as Solid Form 4
- characterized by an expanded P-XRD peak list at many 2θ values (with ±0.2° tolerance) including:
- 7.6, 9.8, 10.8, 11.2, 11.4, 11.7, 12.0, 12.3, 12.7, 13.7, 14.9, 15.1, 15.9, …, 39.8 degrees 2θ
- Claim 11: additional crystalline characterization via selected peaks:
- 19F NMR: -73.6 ±0.1 ppm
- 13C NMR: 26.9 ±0.1 ppm, 21.6 ±0.1 ppm, 41.5 ±0.1 ppm
- Claim 12: amorphous compound
- Claim 13: methyl tert-butyl ether solvate (explicit solvate)
- Claim 14: crystalline compound + methyl tert-butyl ether solvate
- Claim 15: methyl tert-butyl ether solvate, Solid Form 2 with P-XRD peaks at:
- 7.1, 10.5, 11.3, 11.8, 12.5, 12.9, 14.2, 15.7, 16.0, 16.8, 17.0, 18.5, 18.8, 19.1, 19.9, 20.2, 20.8, 21.1, 21.4, 21.7, 22.2, 23.1, 23.4, 23.7, 25.3, 27.3, 27.9, 28.3, 28.5, 29.1, 29.4, 30.2, 30.8, 32.0, 33.3, 33.8, 35.4, 36.4, 36.1 degrees 2θ (±0.2°)
SARS-CoV-2-specific dependent claims
Claims 16 through 30 each state that the coronavirus infection is SARS-CoV-2 and tie back to the corresponding dependent claim structures (Claims 1 through 15). Practically:
- Claim 16: SARS-CoV-2 + the core compound
- Claim 18: SARS-CoV-2 + Claim 1 combination logic
- Claim 23–30: SARS-CoV-2 + each specific form route from Claims 8–15, etc.
What is the claim “center of gravity” for infringement risk?
For infringement analysis, the highest-risk elements are those that cannot be easily avoided:
1) Combination requirement: compound + ritonavir
The method claim is structured so that ritonavir is a required co-administered drug. A design-around that omits ritonavir may avoid literal coverage of these claims, but method-of-treatment portfolios often have other related claims across family members; here you asked only for this patent’s claims and landscape.
2) Stereodefined identity of the compound
The compound name includes explicit stereochemistry: (1R,2S,5S) and (1S) and (3S) assignments inside a multi-chiral scaffold. This makes:
- racemates,
- epimers/diastereomers,
- or differently stereochemically substituted analogs
potentially outside claim scope if they do not meet the exact structural recitation.
3) Form fall-through coverage
Even though there are form-specific dependent claims, Claim 1 already allows solvate or hydrate and Claim 12 allows amorphous. That means a sponsor cannot simply rely on solid-state changes alone unless the alternate form is outside “solvate/hydrate” or outside the exact compound definition.
4) Oral route narrowing
Claims 2–6 and related SARS-CoV-2 embodiments require oral dosing for those dependent claims. If a competitor used parenteral delivery, it could avoid those dependent claim limitations, but the broader Claim 1 would still be a risk for coronavirus treatment by the same co-administration.
How broad is the coverage on dose and schedule?
Dose ranges (Claim 3)
| Parameter |
Claim 3 range |
| Compound |
~10 mg to ~1500 mg/day |
| Ritonavir |
~10 mg to ~1000 mg/day |
Twice-daily discrete regimen (Claims 4–6)
| Claim |
Compound per dose |
Ritonavir per dose |
Frequency |
| Claim 4 |
~100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700, or 750 mg |
Not specified (in claim text) |
Twice daily |
| Claim 5 |
Not specified in claim text |
Ritonavir twice daily |
Twice daily |
| Claim 6 |
~300 mg |
~100 mg |
Twice daily |
This combination of broad daily range + narrower preferred twice-daily dosing creates a “therapeutic window” moat for both exploratory regimens and later fixed-dose label positions.
What does the solid-form claim strategy accomplish?
The patent uses solid-form dependent claims to create parallel coverage tracks that can survive manufacturing and supply-chain variability:
P-XRD fingerprinting (Claims 8, 10, 15)
- Solid Form 1, Solid Form 4, and Solid Form 2 (methyl tert-butyl ether solvate) are defined by multiple diffraction peaks with tight tolerance: ±0.2 degrees 2θ.
Solid-state NMR fingerprinting (Claims 9, 11)
- 19F NMR anchors a signature at -73.3 ±0.1 ppm (Claim 9) or -73.6 ±0.1 ppm (Claim 11).
- 13C NMR provides additional constraints with multiple peak positions.
Practical effect
A manufacturer that changes polymorph, crystallinity, or solvate selection may still land inside the patent if the alternate form matches any of these enumerated analytical fingerprints. The presence of both P-XRD and NMR identifiers reduces the chance that a competitor can claim non-equivalence via one technique alone.
What is the patent landscape implication in the U.S.?
Based strictly on the claim text you provided, this patent sits in a landscape segment that typically includes:
- Method-of-use claims tied to a specific stereodefined active and a known booster (ritonavir),
- Solid form patenting to extend exclusivity around a drug substance’s physical state,
- and variant claims that explicitly name solvate forms (here: methyl tert-butyl ether solvate) and allow both crystalline and amorphous materials.
Key landscape signals from the claim set
- Booster drug coupling (ritonavir) suggests claims are designed to cover an observed clinical co-administration practice, and not only a standalone antiviral.
- Multiple solid forms and analytical fingerprints suggests there is likely a family that includes drug substance and form inventions. In U.S. practice, those are often pursued to extend effective exclusivity via separate patent grants.
- SARS-CoV-2-specific dependent claims indicate the application was framed for COVID-era indications and then locked into specific viral targets.
What this patent can and cannot tell you alone
- It provides detailed claim coverage for this molecule + ritonavir treatment method.
- It does not, from your text alone, provide:
- filing date, patent term, expiration date,
- whether there are continuations,
- whether there are U.S. blocking compositions or additional method patents in the same family,
- whether there are licensing or Hatch-Waxman exclusivity events,
- or prosecution history limiting interpretations.
Given your instruction set, the analysis is limited to scope and landscape inference directly supported by the provided claim language, not to unverified docket-level events.
Claim-by-claim scope map (condensed)
| Claim(s) |
Infectious agent scope |
Required co-administered agent |
Route |
Dose/schedule limits |
Form / analytical limits |
| 1 |
Coronavirus (generic) |
Ritonavir + compound |
Not limited |
Not limited |
Compound can be solvate/hydrate |
| 2 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + compound |
Oral |
Not limited |
Same as Claim 1 |
| 3 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + compound |
Oral |
Compound 10–1500 mg/day; ritonavir 10–1000 mg/day |
Same as Claim 1 |
| 4–5 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + compound |
Oral |
Compound per dose 100–750 mg (set list); twice daily; ritonavir twice daily |
Same as Claim 3/2 limitations |
| 6 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + compound |
Oral |
300 mg compound + 100 mg ritonavir, twice daily |
Same as prior limits |
| 7–11 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + crystalline/amorphous/defined forms |
Oral (indirect via Claim 7’s dependency on Claim 1) |
Not limited |
Crystalline; Solid Form 1 (P-XRD), Solid Form 4 (P-XRD), Solid Form IDs + NMR |
| 12 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + amorphous compound |
Oral (via dependence path) |
Not limited |
Amorphous compound |
| 13–15 |
Coronavirus |
Ritonavir + methyl tert-butyl ether solvate |
Oral (via dependence path) |
Not limited |
Solvate; Solid Form 2 (P-XRD) |
| 16–30 |
SARS-CoV-2 |
Same as corresponding earlier claims |
Same as corresponding earlier claims |
Same as corresponding earlier claims |
Same as corresponding earlier claims |
Key takeaways
- The patent is a combination method-of-treatment: it requires co-administration of a specific stereodefined compound with ritonavir to treat a coronavirus infection, with multiple dependent claims tightening the scenario to oral dosing, dose ranges, and twice-daily regimens.
- Solid-state strategy is central: multiple crystalline and solvate forms are protected via P-XRD peak lists (with ±0.2° 2θ tolerance) and solid-state NMR fingerprints (19F and 13C).
- SARS-CoV-2-specific claim coverage exists across the full stack, meaning the same combination logic plus the same form and dosing limitations can be asserted in a SARS-CoV-2 context.
- Practical design-around pressure point is the mandatory ritonavir requirement; physical form changes alone are less likely to avoid coverage because amorphous, crystalline, solvate, and hydrate options are addressed and enumerated.
FAQs
1) What is the single most important element for claim coverage?
Ritonavir must be co-administered with the specified stereodefined compound to treat a coronavirus infection.
2) Does the patent require a specific route in the broadest claim?
No. Claim 1 does not limit route; oral is required in Claims 2–6 via dependency.
3) Are dose limits mandatory in every claim?
No. Dose ranges appear in Claim 3, and discrete dose and schedule options appear in Claims 4–6. Claim 1 is not dose-limited beyond “therapeutically effective amount.”
4) How are solid forms defined?
By P-XRD diffraction peaks (±0.2° 2θ tolerance) and by solid-state NMR peaks (19F and 13C chemical shifts) in the form-specific dependent claims.
5) What viral indication is explicitly called out?
SARS-CoV-2, via dependent claims 16–30, mapping to the earlier claim structures.
References
[1] United States Patent 11,541,034 (claims as provided in the user prompt).
More… ↓
⤷ Start Trial
|
