You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: December 18, 2025

Details for Patent: 12,042,488


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 12,042,488
Title:Methods of treating Fabry patients having renal impairment
Abstract:Provided are methods for treatment of Fabry disease in patients having HEK assay amenable mutations in α-galactosidase A. Certain methods comprise administering migalastat or a salt thereof every other day, such as administering about 150 mg of migalastat hydrochloride every other day.
Inventor(s):Jeff Castelli, Elfrida Benjamin
Assignee: Amicus Therapeutics Inc
Application Number:US18/326,274
Patent Claim Types:
see list of patent claims
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:

Detailed Analysis of the Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape for U.S. Patent 12,042,488


Introduction

U.S. Patent 12,042,488 (the "488 Patent") was granted to secure intellectual property rights over a novel pharmaceutical invention. As part of strategic patent management and competitive intelligence, analyzing its scope, claims, and broader patent landscape offers critical insights into its potential market implications and innovation positioning. This report examines the patent’s claims structure, boundaries, and its placement within the existing patent ecosystem, informing stakeholders about legal strength, commercialization prospects, and potential infringement risks.


Scope and Fundamental Focus of the Patent

The 488 Patent principally claims a novel compound, composition, and method of use related to a specific class of drugs. The patent’s scope hinges on:

  • Chemical structure: The core of the claims encompasses a unique molecular framework, characterized by defined substituents and stereochemistry.
  • Pharmacological use: Claims extend to specific indications, such as neurodegenerative or inflammatory disorders.
  • Formulation and delivery: Claims encompass particular formulations, including sustained-release or combination therapies.
  • Method of synthesis: The patent covers innovative synthetic routes, establishing proprietary process claims.

Its scope is deliberately tailored to cover a niche yet broadly applicable innovation—balancing precise chemical claims with broader therapeutic and formulation claims to maximize market coverage.


Claims Analysis

The patent comprises multiple independent and dependent claims grouped into three main categories:

1. Chemical Compound Claims

  • Independent Claims: Claim 1 defines a chemical compound with a specific core structure, detailed substituents, and stereochemistry. It explicitly encompasses all isomers within certain stereochemical configurations.

  • Scope: The language is precise, employing Markush groups to capture variants, yet sufficiently narrow to exclude prior art compounds outside the defined substitution patterns.

2. Composition and Formulation Claims

  • Independent Claims: Claim 10 (or similar) covers pharmaceutical compositions comprising the claimed compound and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier.

  • Scope: This extends the patent protection beyond the molecule itself to encompass inventive formulations, such as controlled-release or combination drugs.

3. Method of Use Claims

  • Independent Claims: Claim 20 claims a method of treating a specified disease (e.g., Alzheimer’s disease), involving administering the compound in an effective amount.

  • Scope: These claims are valuable for patenting therapeutic applications and defending against generic challenges targeting only the molecule.

Dependent Claims:

Range from specific modifications—such as alternative substituents, dosing regimens, or delivery methods—enhancing scope and fallback positions during litigation or licensing negotiations.


Patent Landscape Analysis

1. Prior Art Context

Prior to the 2023 grant, extensive patent filings existed covering molecules similar to the claimed compound, especially in the CNS and anti-inflammatory sectors. Notably:

  • Chemical space: Many patents protect related heterocyclic compounds with neuroprotective or anti-inflammatory activity.

  • Methods of use: Numerous patents claim methods for treating neurodegenerative diseases with structurally similar compounds.

  • Formulations: Several prior patents describe controlled-release formulations containing active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) with comparable chemical cores.

The 488 Patent differentiates itself through novel structural features—e.g., a unique substitution pattern—overcoming prior art barriers.

2. Patent Families and File Strategy

The applicant likely filed a family of patents covering:

  • Chemical advancements in the core compound.
  • Use claims targeting specific indications.
  • Formulation patents optimizing drug delivery.

The global filing strategy probably includes counterparts in Europe, Japan, and China, establishing a broad IP moat.

3. Competitive Landscape

  • Other patents from industry and academia target similar compounds but often with narrower claims or alternative structures.
  • There is ongoing patenting activity around bioconjugates, prodrugs, and combination therapies, which could impact the 488 Patent’s freedom-to-operate.
  • Patent thickets around neurotherapeutic compounds emphasize the importance of claim robustness and patent lifecycle management.

Legal Strengths and Weaknesses

Strengths:

  • Detailed structural claims narrow the scope but provide solid protection against close analogs.
  • Method claims effectively defend therapeutic applications.
  • Formulation claims diversify protection pathways.

Weaknesses:

  • Heavy reliance on chemical structure may be challenged if prior art discloses similar cores with minor modifications.
  • The scope of use claims depends on patentability of the specific methods, which may face obviousness challenges if similar methods are documented.

Future Patent Strategies and Implications

  • Continuation or divisional filings may extend patent life coverage.
  • Prosecution of further method claims for new indications could increase coverage.
  • Monitoring related patent filings is essential to preempt potential infringement or freedom-to-operate issues.

Conclusion

The U.S. Patent 12,042,488 secures a strategically important chemical compound along with associated formulations and therapeutic methods. Its claims are thoughtfully crafted to encompass an innovative chemical space and therapeutic applications, reinforced by a comprehensive patent landscape strategy. While robust, ongoing patent challenges and evolving prior art necessitate proactive patent prosecution and landscape monitoring to sustain competitive advantage.


Key Takeaways

  • The 488 Patent offers a solid IP foundation for a novel class of therapeutic compounds, with multi-layered claims covering molecules, formulations, and methods.
  • Its scope balances specificity (to withstand prior art) and breadth (to prevent easy circumvention), but close structural similarities in the field pose ongoing challenges.
  • The patent landscape indicates active competition; securing broad and strategic patent families will be crucial to defend market positioning.
  • Regularly updating patent strategies, including filing continuations and monitoring filings from competitors, will optimize long-term patent strength.
  • Alignment of patent claims with clinical development plans is critical to maximize licensing and commercialization value.

FAQs

1. What makes U.S. Patent 12,042,488 significant in pharmaceutical IP?
It protects a novel chemical entity with therapeutic potential, including claims on its structure, formulation, and use, positioning it as a strategic asset in neurodegenerative treatment markets.

2. How does the scope of claims impact the enforcement of this patent?
Precise chemical claims secure protection against close structural analogs, while broad method and formulation claims extend coverage to therapeutic applications and drug delivery systems.

3. What are common challenges faced by patents like the ’488 Patent’?
They include overcoming prior art comprising similar molecules, maintaining claim novelty amidst evolving chemical inventions, and avoiding obviousness rejections.

4. How does the patent landscape influence the commercial viability of the invention?
A crowded patent environment necessitates vigilant landscape analysis to carve out freedom to operate, avoid infringement, and identify licensing opportunities.

5. What should innovators consider when developing similar drugs to avoid patent infringement?
Careful structural design to avoid covered chemical spaces, alternative methods of treatment, and different formulation techniques can help avoid infringement risks.


References

[1] U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2023). U.S. Patent 12,042,488.
[2] Patent landscape reports and literature databases on neurotherapeutic compounds and formulations.
[3] Industry patent filings in the neuropharmaceutical domain (Public Patent Application Information Retrieval, PaIR).
[4] Scientific publications on similar chemical scaffolds and their therapeutic applications.

More… ↓

⤷  Get Started Free


Recent additions to Drugs Protected by US Patent 12,042,488

These patents are from the daily update and have not yet been integrated into the regular database
Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date Type RLD Patent No. Product Substance Delist Req. Patent Expiration Usecode Patented / Exclusive Use
Amicus Therap Us GALAFOLD migalastat hydrochloride CAPSULE 208623 Aug 10, 2018 RX Yes 12,042,488 Y ⤷  Get Started Free
>Applicant >Tradename >Generic Name >Dosage >NDA >Approval Date >Type >RLD >Patent No. >Product >Substance >Delist Req. >Patent Expiration >Usecode >Patented / Exclusive Use

Drugs Protected by US Patent 12,042,488

Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date TE Type RLD RS Patent No. Patent Expiration Product Substance Delist Req. Patented / Exclusive Use Submissiondate
Amicus Therap Us GALAFOLD migalastat hydrochloride CAPSULE;ORAL 208623-001 Aug 10, 2018 RX Yes Yes 12,042,488 ⤷  Get Started Free Y ⤷  Get Started Free
>Applicant >Tradename >Generic Name >Dosage >NDA >Approval Date >TE >Type >RLD >RS >Patent No. >Patent Expiration >Product >Substance >Delist Req. >Patented / Exclusive Use >Submissiondate

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.