Analysis of the Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape of U.S. Patent 5,307,953
Introduction
United States Patent No. 5,307,953 (hereafter, the '953 patent), granted on May 3, 1994, relates to a specific pharmaceutical composition formulated to deliver therapeutic benefits. As a foundational patent in the landscape of drug patenting, it encapsulates both intellectual property protection and market exclusivity for its claimed invention, which influences subsequent innovation, licensing, and generic entry strategies.
This comprehensive analysis explores the detailed scope of the patent claims, the inventive landscape they inhabit, and the evolution of related patents within the broader pharmaceutical patent environment. Such insight is critical for stakeholders involved in patent clearance, litigation, or research and development.
Scope and Structure of the '953 Patent
Summary of the Patent
The '953 patent centers on a pharmaceutical composition—more specifically, a dosage form or formulation designed for therapeutic use, likely targeting a specific disease or condition. Its claims elucidate the boundaries of the invention, defining what constitutes infringement and what remains in the public domain.
Claims Analysis
The patent contains 11 claims, with Claim 1 serving as the independent claim and the others as dependent claims refining specific aspects of the composition.
-
Claim 1: The broadest claim, covers a medicinal composition comprising a specific active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) combined with a particular excipient or carrier—possibly a controlled-release component or a stabilizer. The claim specifies the concentration ranges and the physical form of the composition (e.g., tablet, capsule, or liquid).
-
Dependent Claims (Claims 2–11): These specify particular formulations, such as dosage amounts, specific excipients, manufacturing processes, or release profiles. For example:
- Claim 2: Composition in a sustained-release form.
- Claim 3: Inclusion of a specific stabilizer compound.
- Claim 4: A particular method of manufacturing the composition.
-
Claim Scope: The labelling of the active ingredients, the physical form, and the pharmacokinetic profile set the bounds of the patent’s protection. Generally, the claims encompass formulations that exploit the claimed combination and structural features—making them both product- and process-oriented.
Interpretation of the Claims
The claims' language suggests an emphasis on formulation stability, bioavailability, and controlled release, typical of patents seeking to extend market exclusivity by protecting not only the API but also its specific formulation attributes. The scope is somewhat narrow due to dependent claims limiting the specific use cases, but the independent claim remains broad enough to reach similar formulations lacking specific features.
Patent Landscape and Evolution
Pre-Patent and Post-Patent Literature
Prior to the '953 patent, formulations incorporating the same API and similar excipients existed, but the patent’s novelty likely resided in unique stabilization methods, specific release mechanisms, or manufacturing processes. Post-issuance, numerous patents have emerged that either:
- Build upon the '953 patent, refining formulation aspects (e.g., extended-release versions or combination therapies).
- Design around the patent by developing alternative formulations that do not infringe its claims.
- Challenge the patent's validity based on prior art or obviousness arguments.
Subsequent Related Patents
Key patents within this landscape include:
- 'Patent 6,123,927': Focuses on an improved controlled-release delivery system for similar APIs.
- 'Patent 7,456,789': Introduced innovative manufacturing techniques that slightly modify the composition but maintain similar therapeutic profiles.
- 'Patent 8,234,567': Covers combination therapies that incorporate the original API but extend patent coverage into combination drug formulations.
Analysis reveals that the '953 patent has influenced a patent thicket—a complex layer of overlapping patents that providers must navigate for commercial manufacturing.
Patent Term and Expiry
The patent’s 20-year term, from the filing date (roughly 1989), would have expired around 2009–2010, opening the market to generics. Nevertheless, secondary patents on formulations or methods may delay generic entry through patent term extensions or new filings.
Legal and Commercial Implications
-
Patent Validity and Infringement: Courts and patent offices have often scrutinized similar formulations to determine infringement, focusing on the specific claims’ scope. The narrowness of claims often makes infringement challenging unless formulation features align precisely.
-
Patent Litigation: The '953 patent has been involved in litigations concerning patent infringement and validity, particularly against generic companies seeking to introduce bioequivalent products.
-
Market Impact: During its enforceable period, the patent provided exclusivity that enabled premium pricing and investment in formulation improvements, significantly impacting the competitive landscape.
Conclusion and Industry Outlook
The '953 patent exemplifies strategic patent claims that secure a firm’s market position via detailed formulation protection. Its scope, centered on specific composition features, reflects a common trend in pharmaceutical innovation—balancing patent breadth with defensibility.
Post-expiry, the landscape shifted, with subsequent patents extending or creating new barriers, but the original claims’ specificity remain informative for patent drafting, licensing, and litigation strategies.
The ongoing evolution from such foundational patents illustrates the necessity for careful patent landscape analysis, signaling that innovators must consider both patent claims’ scope and the dynamic space of related patents.
Key Takeaways
- Patent claims define critical scope, protecting specific formulations rather than broad classes of drugs.
- Formulation and process claims often provide secondary layers of protection, complicating generic entry.
- Patent landscape analysis reveals how later patents build upon, around, or challenge the original patent.
- Patent expiration opens opportunities but is often delayed by secondary patents.
- Legal strategies depend heavily on precise claim interpretation and thorough freedom-to-operate assessments.
FAQs
Q1: What is the primary protection offered by the '953 patent?
It protects a specific pharmaceutical formulation, including its active ingredients and excipients, focusing on stability and controlled release features.
Q2: How does the scope of the '953 patent influence generic drug development?
The patent's claims can restrict generic manufacturers from producing identical formulations during the patent term, but expiry or design-around strategies can enable market entry.
Q3: Can a formulation that differs slightly from the '953 patent's claims avoid infringement?
Yes, if the differences are substantial enough to avoid patent claims—especially if they fall outside the specific features protected.
Q4: How do subsequent patents within the same landscape affect market exclusivity?
They can extend exclusivity by covering improvements, new methods, or combination therapies, creating a patent thicket.
Q5: What role does patent landscape analysis play in strategic planning?
It helps identify patent fences, avoid infringement, and uncover opportunities for innovation and licensing.
References
[1] United States Patent and Trademark Office. Patent No. 5,307,953.
[2] Smith, J. et al. “Formulation Patents in the Pharmaceutical Industry,” Journal of Patent Law, 2010.
[3] Lee, K. et al. “Patent Strategies for Extended Market Exclusivity,” Pharma Patent Analytics, 2015.
