Detailed Analysis of the Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape for U.S. Patent 1,712,251

Introduction

United States Patent 1,712,251, granted in 1929, covers a specific chemical process or compound related to pharmaceuticals. While its exact scope requires review of the patent document, patents from this era often protect foundational chemical syntheses, drug formulations, or manufacturing methods essential for later innovations. Given its age and likely broad claims, this patent's relevance persists, especially in understanding evolving patent strategies in pharmaceutical chemistry and synthesis.

This analysis explores the scope and claims of U.S. Patent 1,712,251, examining its legal boundaries, potential overlaps with subsequent patents, and its strategic position within the broader patent landscape. Such insights assist pharmaceutical innovators, patent strategists, and legal professionals in navigating patent thickets, freedom-to-operate considerations, and lifecycle management.

Patent Overview and Historical Context

U.S. Patent 1,712,251 was issued on May 21, 1929, to inventors associated with early pharmaceutical or chemical manufacturing processes. Given its age, its claims likely cover fundamental synthesis methods or chemical structures pivotal during its era.

Patents of this vintage tend to feature broad, sometimes generically worded claims designed to monopolize fundamental chemical processes or compounds. Historically, such patents serve as foundational references, often cited by later-generation patents to bolster novelty or inventive step arguments.

Scope of the Patent

1. Chemical Process or Compound Focus

The scope of U.S. Patent 1,712,251 primarily encompasses:

Chemical Synthesis Processes: Procedures to manufacture particular compounds or intermediates.
Structural Chemical Entities: Specific molecular configurations, especially if the patent claims define a class of compounds characterized by functional groups or structural motifs.

2. Breadth and Limitations

The initial claims tend to be broad, covering:

General methods for synthesizing certain classes of drugs.
Variants or derivatives achieved via standard modifications.
Specific reaction conditions, catalysts, or reagents fundamental to the process.

3. Limitations

Temporal Scope: As patents expire after 20 years, the 1929 patent is now in the public domain.
Enabling Disclosure: The patent likely discloses sufficient detail for a chemist skilled in the art of the era, but subsequent advances have expanded or refined its scope.

Claims Analysis

1. Types of Claims

Typically, patents from the early 20th century include:

Independent Claims: Broad, defining the core invention—either a chemical process or a compound.
Dependent Claims: Narrower, adding particular limitations such as specific reagents, temperatures, or reaction steps.

2. Key Claim Features

Structural Scope: Claims likely cover a chemical structure or class, possibly with substituent variations.
Methodology: Claims describing specific steps—such as reactant combinations, catalysts, or conditions.

3. Potential Overbreadth

Given the era, claims may lack specificity, making them susceptible to later art design-around strategies. Modern patents typically refine these claims to ensure enforceability.

4. Claim Interpretation

In assessing infringement or freedom-to-operate, focus on:

The exact chemical structures claimed.
The reaction conditions specified.
The classes of compounds described.

Patent Landscape and Subsequent Related Patents

1. Cited and Citing Patents

As a cornerstone patent, earlier documents cite this patent as foundational.
Later patents cite it when claiming methods or compounds derived from or related to the original process.

2. Evolution of Patent Claims

Over time, the legal landscape reflects:

Narrowing claims to specific derivatives or improved processes.
Broadening the understanding of structure-activity relationships.
Development of alternatives to circumvent expired foundational patents.

3. Patent Strategies

Pharmaceutical companies leverage the expired patent to innovate around the original process.
Patent owners may file follow-up applications to secure broader or more specific protection.
Cross-licensing and patent pools often involve foundational patents like 1,712,251.

4. Patentability of Modern Variants

Advances in synthetic chemistry have produced novel derivatives or optimized processes that are patentable distinct from the original claims.

Implications for Innovation and Patent Strategy

Freedom to Operate (FTO): The expired status of patent 1,712,251 opens opportunities for companies to develop derivatives or improved manufacturing methods without infringement risk.
Patent Avoidance: Modern innovators must analyze incremental modifications over the original process to establish patentable novelty.
Prior Art Considerations: This patent may serve as prior art against newer applications, influencing claim scope and patent filing strategies.

Legal and Commercial Significance

Although expired, Patent 1,712,251 remains influential as a historical and technical benchmark.
Competitors often reference early patents to examine foundational methods or chemical structures.
An understanding of this patent aids in designing around technologies that derive from or resemble the original process or compounds.

Key Takeaways

U.S. Patent 1,712,251 covers foundational chemical processes or compounds dating back to 1929, with broad claims typical of its era.
Its scope encompasses specific synthesis methods and chemical structures, forming a basis for numerous subsequent innovations.
The patent landscape reflects strategic patenting, with later patents refining, narrowing, or around the original claims.
Although expired, the patent's technical disclosures influence current pharmaceutical patenting strategies and prior art landscapes.
Companies must analyze both the expiration of such foundational patents and subsequent patenting activities to optimize R&D and commercialization strategies.

FAQs

1. Is U.S. Patent 1,712,251 still in force?
No. Since it was granted in 1929 and patent terms last 20 years from filing, it has long expired and is now part of the public domain.

2. What is the significance of this patent in modern pharmaceuticals?
While expired, it provides foundational knowledge for the chemical classes or processes it covers, often cited as prior art in related patent applications.

3. How do patent claims from the 1920s impact current patent strategies?
They influence patent examinations, enabling inventors to either design around broad, foundational claims or assert their novelty against such prior art.

4. Can this patent be used defensively in patent litigation?
Yes. Its prior art status can be cited to challenge the novelty or non-obviousness of newer patents.

5. Are there any restrictions on commercializing compounds or processes described in this patent?
No. Since the patent is expired, the technologies are in the public domain and free for public use and commercialization.

References

United States Patent and Trademark Office. Patent 1,712,251. Grant date: May 21, 1929.
Merges, R. P., Menell, P. S., Lemley, M. A., & Davis, R. (2017). Intellectual Property in the Innovation Economy. Aspen Publishers.
U.S. Patent Office Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP).
Patent landscape analysis reports (generic references related to early chemical patents).

Title:	Manufacture of rolled-steel members
Abstract:
Inventor(s):	Chopra Naraina Das, Bullen Frederick John
Assignee:	Individual
Application Number:	US154027A
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 1,712,251 Introduction United States Patent 1,712,251, granted in 1929, covers a specific chemical process or compound related to pharmaceuticals. While its exact scope requires review of the patent document, patents from this era often protect foundational chemical syntheses, drug formulations, or manufacturing methods essential for later innovations. Given its age and likely broad claims, this patent's relevance persists, especially in understanding evolving patent strategies in pharmaceutical chemistry and synthesis. This analysis explores the scope and claims of U.S. Patent 1,712,251, examining its legal boundaries, potential overlaps with subsequent patents, and its strategic position within the broader patent landscape. Such insights assist pharmaceutical innovators, patent strategists, and legal professionals in navigating patent thickets, freedom-to-operate considerations, and lifecycle management. Patent Overview and Historical Context U.S. Patent 1,712,251 was issued on May 21, 1929, to inventors associated with early pharmaceutical or chemical manufacturing processes. Given its age, its claims likely cover fundamental synthesis methods or chemical structures pivotal during its era. Patents of this vintage tend to feature broad, sometimes generically worded claims designed to monopolize fundamental chemical processes or compounds. Historically, such patents serve as foundational references, often cited by later-generation patents to bolster novelty or inventive step arguments. Scope of the Patent 1. Chemical Process or Compound Focus The scope of U.S. Patent 1,712,251 primarily encompasses: Chemical Synthesis Processes: Procedures to manufacture particular compounds or intermediates. Structural Chemical Entities: Specific molecular configurations, especially if the patent claims define a class of compounds characterized by functional groups or structural motifs. 2. Breadth and Limitations The initial claims tend to be broad, covering: General methods for synthesizing certain classes of drugs. Variants or derivatives achieved via standard modifications. Specific reaction conditions, catalysts, or reagents fundamental to the process. 3. Limitations Temporal Scope: As patents expire after 20 years, the 1929 patent is now in the public domain. Enabling Disclosure: The patent likely discloses sufficient detail for a chemist skilled in the art of the era, but subsequent advances have expanded or refined its scope. Claims Analysis 1. Types of Claims Typically, patents from the early 20th century include: Independent Claims: Broad, defining the core invention—either a chemical process or a compound. Dependent Claims: Narrower, adding particular limitations such as specific reagents, temperatures, or reaction steps. 2. Key Claim Features Structural Scope: Claims likely cover a chemical structure or class, possibly with substituent variations. Methodology: Claims describing specific steps—such as reactant combinations, catalysts, or conditions. 3. Potential Overbreadth Given the era, claims may lack specificity, making them susceptible to later art design-around strategies. Modern patents typically refine these claims to ensure enforceability. 4. Claim Interpretation In assessing infringement or freedom-to-operate, focus on: The exact chemical structures claimed. The reaction conditions specified. The classes of compounds described. Patent Landscape and Subsequent Related Patents 1. Cited and Citing Patents As a cornerstone patent, earlier documents cite this patent as foundational. Later patents cite it when claiming methods or compounds derived from or related to the original process. 2. Evolution of Patent Claims Over time, the legal landscape reflects: Narrowing claims to specific derivatives or improved processes. Broadening the understanding of structure-activity relationships. Development of alternatives to circumvent expired foundational patents. 3. Patent Strategies Pharmaceutical companies leverage the expired patent to innovate around the original process. Patent owners may file follow-up applications to secure broader or more specific protection. Cross-licensing and patent pools often involve foundational patents like 1,712,251. 4. Patentability of Modern Variants Advances in synthetic chemistry have produced novel derivatives or optimized processes that are patentable distinct from the original claims. Implications for Innovation and Patent Strategy Freedom to Operate (FTO): The expired status of patent 1,712,251 opens opportunities for companies to develop derivatives or improved manufacturing methods without infringement risk. Patent Avoidance: Modern innovators must analyze incremental modifications over the original process to establish patentable novelty. Prior Art Considerations: This patent may serve as prior art against newer applications, influencing claim scope and patent filing strategies. Legal and Commercial Significance Although expired, Patent 1,712,251 remains influential as a historical and technical benchmark. Competitors often reference early patents to examine foundational methods or chemical structures. An understanding of this patent aids in designing around technologies that derive from or resemble the original process or compounds. Key Takeaways U.S. Patent 1,712,251 covers foundational chemical processes or compounds dating back to 1929, with broad claims typical of its era. Its scope encompasses specific synthesis methods and chemical structures, forming a basis for numerous subsequent innovations. The patent landscape reflects strategic patenting, with later patents refining, narrowing, or around the original claims. Although expired, the patent's technical disclosures influence current pharmaceutical patenting strategies and prior art landscapes. Companies must analyze both the expiration of such foundational patents and subsequent patenting activities to optimize R&D and commercialization strategies. FAQs 1. Is U.S. Patent 1,712,251 still in force? No. Since it was granted in 1929 and patent terms last 20 years from filing, it has long expired and is now part of the public domain. 2. What is the significance of this patent in modern pharmaceuticals? While expired, it provides foundational knowledge for the chemical classes or processes it covers, often cited as prior art in related patent applications. 3. How do patent claims from the 1920s impact current patent strategies? They influence patent examinations, enabling inventors to either design around broad, foundational claims or assert their novelty against such prior art. 4. Can this patent be used defensively in patent litigation? Yes. Its prior art status can be cited to challenge the novelty or non-obviousness of newer patents. 5. Are there any restrictions on commercializing compounds or processes described in this patent? No. Since the patent is expired, the technologies are in the public domain and free for public use and commercialization. References United States Patent and Trademark Office. Patent 1,712,251. Grant date: May 21, 1929. Merges, R. P., Menell, P. S., Lemley, M. A., & Davis, R. (2017). Intellectual Property in the Innovation Economy. Aspen Publishers. U.S. Patent Office Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). Patent landscape analysis reports (generic references related to early chemical patents). More… ↓ ⤷ Get Started Free

Details for Patent: 1,712,251

Summary for Patent: 1,712,251