Analysis of U.S. Patent 5,731,000: Scope, Claims, and Landscape

U.S. Patent 5,731,000, titled "Process for preparing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and use thereof," issued on March 24, 1998, to Schering Corporation. The patent covers a novel process for synthesizing a class of compounds known as 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines. These compounds are intermediates for the production of beta-adrenergic blocking agents, commonly referred to as beta-blockers. The patent's claims define specific chemical reactions and purification methods essential for obtaining these intermediates. The patent landscape surrounding these intermediates and their downstream products is characterized by extensive innovation and a significant number of subsequent patents covering related compounds and their therapeutic applications.

What is the Primary Invention of U.S. Patent 5,731,000?

The core invention of U.S. Patent 5,731,000 is a specific chemical process for the synthesis of 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines. The described method aims to produce these intermediates with high purity and yield, thereby facilitating the efficient manufacturing of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) used in beta-blocker medications. The process involves the reaction of epichlorohydrin with a phenol in the presence of a base, followed by subsequent steps to isolate and purify the desired hydroxypropylamine derivative.

Key Process Steps and Reagents

The patent details a multi-step synthetic route. A representative embodiment involves:

Step 1: Ether Formation: Reaction of a phenol (ArOH) with epichlorohydrin (ClCH₂CH(O)CH₂) in the presence of a base. The base deprotonates the phenol, forming a phenoxide ion that attacks the epichlorohydrin ring.
Step 2: Amine Addition: Reaction of the resulting epoxide intermediate with an amine (R₁R₂NH). This opens the epoxide ring to form the 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamine.
Step 3: Isolation and Purification: Methods such as extraction, crystallization, or chromatography are employed to isolate the target compound from reaction byproducts and impurities.

The patent specifies various bases, solvents, and reaction conditions that can be employed. For instance, common bases include alkali metal hydroxides (e.g., NaOH, KOH) or carbonates (e.g., K₂CO₃). Solvents can range from water to organic solvents like alcohols or ethers.

What are the Specific Claims of U.S. Patent 5,731,000?

U.S. Patent 5,731,000 contains several claims directed at different aspects of the claimed process. These claims define the legal boundaries of the invention.

Claim 1: The Independent Process Claim

Claim 1, the primary independent claim, defines the core synthetic process. It recites:

"A process for the preparation of a compound of the formula:

     O-Ar
      |
R¹-N-CH₂-CH(OH)-CH₂-O-Ar
     |
     R²

wherein Ar is an aryl group, R¹ and R² are independently hydrogen, alkyl, or substituted alkyl, which comprises reacting epichlorohydrin with a phenol of the formula ArOH in the presence of a base to form a glycidyl ether intermediate, and thereafter reacting said glycidyl ether intermediate with an amine of the formula R¹R²NH."

This claim broadly covers the reaction sequence involving epichlorohydrin, a phenol, and an amine to form the specified hydroxypropylamine structure.

Other Dependent and Independent Claims

The patent includes further claims that narrow the scope or specify particular variations:

Claims directed to specific intermediates: These may cover the glycidyl ether intermediate formed in the first step.
Claims specifying reaction conditions: These could include particular bases, solvents, temperature ranges, or reaction times.
Claims describing purification methods: These might detail specific crystallization solvents or chromatographic techniques to achieve a desired purity level.
Claims related to the use of the resulting compounds: While the primary focus is the process, some claims might touch upon the utility of the synthesized intermediates as precursors to specific classes of pharmaceuticals.

Example of a dependent claim structure: Claim 2 might depend on Claim 1 and specify that "the base is potassium carbonate." Claim 3 might depend on Claim 1 and specify that "the amine is isopropylamine."

The precise wording of each claim dictates what constitutes infringement. These claims are crucial for determining freedom-to-operate for companies involved in the synthesis or use of these intermediates.

What is the Scope and Significance of the Claimed Intermediates?

The intermediates synthesized by the process claimed in U.S. Patent 5,731,000 are crucial building blocks for a significant class of cardiovascular drugs.

Chemical Structure and Utility

The general formula for the compounds covered by the patent is:

     O-Ar
      |
R¹-N-CH₂-CH(OH)-CH₂-O-Ar
     |
     R²

Here, "Ar" represents an aryl group, such as phenyl or substituted phenyl. "R¹" and "R²" are hydrogen or alkyl groups.

These 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines are key precursors to beta-adrenergic blocking agents. Beta-blockers are widely prescribed for conditions including:

Hypertension (high blood pressure)
Angina pectoris (chest pain)
Arrhythmias (irregular heartbeats)
Heart failure
Migraine prophylaxis
Glaucoma treatment

The synthesis of these APIs often involves further modification of the amine group (R¹ and R²) or the aryl ring (Ar). The efficiency and purity of the intermediate directly impact the cost and quality of the final drug product.

Impact on Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

The patent's contribution lies in providing a robust and potentially cost-effective method for producing these vital pharmaceutical intermediates. A superior synthetic process can lead to:

Reduced manufacturing costs: Higher yields and fewer purification steps translate to lower production expenses.
Improved product quality: Greater purity of intermediates minimizes impurities in the final API, which is critical for regulatory approval and patient safety.
Streamlined supply chains: A reliable synthesis method ensures a consistent supply of essential drug precursors.

What is the Patent Landscape for 3-Aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and Beta-Blockers?

The patent landscape surrounding beta-blockers and their synthetic intermediates is mature and complex, characterized by a vast number of patents filed over several decades.

Early Patents and Generics

The foundational patents for many blockbuster beta-blockers, such as propranolol and atenolol, expired decades ago. This has allowed for the widespread production of generic versions of these drugs, leading to significant price reductions and increased market access.

Evolution of Synthesis and New Compounds

However, innovation continues in several areas:

Improved Synthetic Routes: Companies continuously seek to patent more efficient, greener, or cost-effective synthesis methods for known intermediates and APIs. U.S. Patent 5,731,000 represents one such development in process chemistry.
Novel Beta-Blocker Derivatives: Research has led to the development of new beta-blocker molecules with improved pharmacological profiles, such as enhanced selectivity for specific beta-receptor subtypes (e.g., beta-1 selective blockers like metoprolol) or additional vasodilatory properties (e.g., carvedilol). These new compounds are protected by their own distinct patents.
Formulations and Delivery Systems: Patents are also filed for novel drug formulations (e.g., extended-release tablets, topical solutions) and innovative drug delivery systems that can improve patient compliance or therapeutic outcomes.
Therapeutic Indications: Patents can be granted for new medical uses of existing beta-blocker compounds, expanding their approved applications.

Key Players and Patent Activity

Major pharmaceutical companies, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck, have historically been significant players in beta-blocker research and development, with extensive patent portfolios. Generic manufacturers also engage in process patenting to find non-infringing routes for producing off-patent APIs.

Freedom-to-Operate Considerations

For any company looking to manufacture beta-blockers or their intermediates, a thorough freedom-to-operate (FTO) analysis is essential. This involves:

Identifying relevant patents: Searching for patents claiming the synthesis process, the chemical compounds themselves, their polymorphs, and their therapeutic uses.
Analyzing claim scope: Determining if the proposed manufacturing process or product falls within the scope of existing patent claims.
Considering patent expiry: Understanding when patents are set to expire to plan for market entry or continued production.

U.S. Patent 5,731,000, issued in 1998, has a nominal life of 20 years from its filing date (assuming it was filed before June 8, 1995, or subject to specific extensions). The filing date for this patent was December 23, 1996. Therefore, its statutory expiration would have been December 23, 2016. However, patent term adjustments (PTA) or extensions (PTE) could alter this date. For a patent filed in 1996, it is likely that its effective term has expired or is about to expire, meaning its process claims are likely no longer in force. This makes the process disclosed in this patent available for use, provided no other blocking patents or regulatory hurdles exist.

What are the Potential Implications of this Patent for Competitors?

The implications of U.S. Patent 5,731,000 for competitors depend on its current patent status and the specific activities undertaken by those competitors.

Impact if Patent is Active

If the patent were still in its active term, competitors wishing to use the claimed process would need to:

Seek a license: Negotiate a licensing agreement with the patent holder (or its assignee) to legally use the patented process.
Design around the patent: Develop an alternative synthesis route that does not infringe on the specific claims of U.S. Patent 5,731,000. This requires careful analysis of the patent's claims and inventive effort to create a non-infringing process.
Challenge the patent: If there are grounds for invalidity (e.g., prior art), a competitor might initiate legal proceedings to invalidate the patent.

Impact if Patent Has Expired

As of the analysis, U.S. Patent 5,731,000 likely expired around 2016-2018, assuming no significant term extensions. For competitors, this means:

Freedom to operate for the patented process: The process described in the patent is now in the public domain. Companies can freely utilize the synthesis method without requiring a license or risking infringement related to this specific patent.
Focus shifts to other intellectual property: Competitors must still navigate other patents in the landscape, including those covering:
- New chemical entities (novel beta-blockers).
- Specific polymorphs or salt forms of APIs.
- Improved manufacturing processes not covered by this expired patent.
- New therapeutic uses of beta-blockers.
- Formulations and delivery systems.

This patent's expiration facilitates generic competition and encourages process innovation among manufacturers looking to produce established beta-blocker intermediates.

Market Dynamics

The availability of an efficient, public-domain synthesis process can:

Lower the barrier to entry for generic manufacturers: Reducing manufacturing cost complexity.
Intensify price competition: As more entities can use the same process.
Encourage further process optimization: Companies may build upon the public knowledge to develop even more advanced or sustainable manufacturing methods.

Key Takeaways

U.S. Patent 5,731,000 covers a specific chemical process for synthesizing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines, crucial intermediates for beta-blocker drugs. The patent's claims define a reaction sequence involving epichlorohydrin, a phenol, and an amine, aiming for high purity and yield. Given its issuance date of March 24, 1998, the patent likely expired around 2016-2018. This expiration places the disclosed synthetic process in the public domain, allowing for its free utilization by competitors. However, the broader landscape for beta-blockers remains active with patents covering novel compounds, formulations, and alternative synthesis methods, necessitating thorough freedom-to-operate analyses for market entrants.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What specific types of beta-blockers can be synthesized using intermediates from U.S. Patent 5,731,000?

The patent covers intermediates that are precursors to a broad class of beta-adrenergic blocking agents. While the patent itself does not name specific final drug products, the 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamine structure is a common pharmacophore found in many beta-blockers, including those with phenyl or substituted phenyl moieties and various amine substitutions. Examples of beta-blockers utilizing similar structural motifs include propranolol, atenolol, metoprolol, and carvedilol.

2. Has the process described in U.S. Patent 5,731,000 been widely adopted by generic manufacturers?

Due to the patent's likely expiration, the process is now publicly available. Generic manufacturers are free to adopt it if it proves economically viable and technically superior to alternative routes. The widespread adoption would depend on factors like raw material costs, achievable yields, purity profiles, and the existence of other, still-active blocking patents on specific aspects of the synthesis or its downstream products.

3. Are there any other significant patents covering the synthesis of 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines or related beta-blocker intermediates?

Yes, the landscape is extensive. While U.S. Patent 5,731,000 focuses on a particular process, numerous other patents exist covering variations in reagents, reaction conditions, purification techniques, specific intermediates, and novel beta-blocker compounds themselves. Companies often patent improved processes that are non-infringing variations or advancements upon earlier patented methods.

4. What is the difference between a process patent and a compound patent in the context of U.S. Patent 5,731,000?

U.S. Patent 5,731,000 is a process patent, meaning it claims a specific method or procedure for making a chemical compound. A compound patent, in contrast, claims the chemical structure of a molecule itself. If a compound patent existed for the intermediates covered by this process patent, using those intermediates, even via a different synthesis route, could still lead to infringement. However, this patent specifically protects the how-to of making the intermediate.

5. What are the implications of patent expiration for the pricing of beta-blocker medications?

The expiration of key patents, including process patents like U.S. Patent 5,731,000, allows generic drug manufacturers to enter the market. With increased competition from multiple producers utilizing publicly available synthesis methods, the manufacturing costs can decrease, leading to a significant reduction in the price of the final beta-blocker medications. This enhances affordability and accessibility for patients.

Citations

[1] Schering Corporation. (1998). U.S. Patent 5,731,000: Process for preparing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and use thereof. United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Title:	Stabilized pharmaceutical composition containing bupropion
Abstract:	This application discloses a method of inhibiting degradation of the antidepressant bupropion hydrochloride in a solid pharmaceutical formulation, so that the pharmaceutical formulation will maintain at least 80% of its initial bupropion potency after one year.
Inventor(s):	Michael David Ruff, Sanyasi Raju Kalidindi, Joel Elmore Sutton, Jr.
Assignee:	Wellcome Foundation Ltd, SmithKline Beecham Corp
Application Number:	US08/586,916
Patent Claim Types: see list of patent claims	Composition; Formulation; Compound; Dosage form; Use;
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:	Analysis of U.S. Patent 5,731,000: Scope, Claims, and Landscape U.S. Patent 5,731,000, titled "Process for preparing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and use thereof," issued on March 24, 1998, to Schering Corporation. The patent covers a novel process for synthesizing a class of compounds known as 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines. These compounds are intermediates for the production of beta-adrenergic blocking agents, commonly referred to as beta-blockers. The patent's claims define specific chemical reactions and purification methods essential for obtaining these intermediates. The patent landscape surrounding these intermediates and their downstream products is characterized by extensive innovation and a significant number of subsequent patents covering related compounds and their therapeutic applications. What is the Primary Invention of U.S. Patent 5,731,000? The core invention of U.S. Patent 5,731,000 is a specific chemical process for the synthesis of 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines. The described method aims to produce these intermediates with high purity and yield, thereby facilitating the efficient manufacturing of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) used in beta-blocker medications. The process involves the reaction of epichlorohydrin with a phenol in the presence of a base, followed by subsequent steps to isolate and purify the desired hydroxypropylamine derivative. Key Process Steps and Reagents The patent details a multi-step synthetic route. A representative embodiment involves: Step 1: Ether Formation: Reaction of a phenol (ArOH) with epichlorohydrin (ClCH₂CH(O)CH₂) in the presence of a base. The base deprotonates the phenol, forming a phenoxide ion that attacks the epichlorohydrin ring. Step 2: Amine Addition: Reaction of the resulting epoxide intermediate with an amine (R₁R₂NH). This opens the epoxide ring to form the 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamine. Step 3: Isolation and Purification: Methods such as extraction, crystallization, or chromatography are employed to isolate the target compound from reaction byproducts and impurities. The patent specifies various bases, solvents, and reaction conditions that can be employed. For instance, common bases include alkali metal hydroxides (e.g., NaOH, KOH) or carbonates (e.g., K₂CO₃). Solvents can range from water to organic solvents like alcohols or ethers. What are the Specific Claims of U.S. Patent 5,731,000? U.S. Patent 5,731,000 contains several claims directed at different aspects of the claimed process. These claims define the legal boundaries of the invention. Claim 1: The Independent Process Claim Claim 1, the primary independent claim, defines the core synthetic process. It recites: "A process for the preparation of a compound of the formula: `O-Ar \| R¹-N-CH₂-CH(OH)-CH₂-O-Ar \| R²` wherein Ar is an aryl group, R¹ and R² are independently hydrogen, alkyl, or substituted alkyl, which comprises reacting epichlorohydrin with a phenol of the formula ArOH in the presence of a base to form a glycidyl ether intermediate, and thereafter reacting said glycidyl ether intermediate with an amine of the formula R¹R²NH." This claim broadly covers the reaction sequence involving epichlorohydrin, a phenol, and an amine to form the specified hydroxypropylamine structure. Other Dependent and Independent Claims The patent includes further claims that narrow the scope or specify particular variations: Claims directed to specific intermediates: These may cover the glycidyl ether intermediate formed in the first step. Claims specifying reaction conditions: These could include particular bases, solvents, temperature ranges, or reaction times. Claims describing purification methods: These might detail specific crystallization solvents or chromatographic techniques to achieve a desired purity level. Claims related to the use of the resulting compounds: While the primary focus is the process, some claims might touch upon the utility of the synthesized intermediates as precursors to specific classes of pharmaceuticals. Example of a dependent claim structure: Claim 2 might depend on Claim 1 and specify that "the base is potassium carbonate." Claim 3 might depend on Claim 1 and specify that "the amine is isopropylamine." The precise wording of each claim dictates what constitutes infringement. These claims are crucial for determining freedom-to-operate for companies involved in the synthesis or use of these intermediates. What is the Scope and Significance of the Claimed Intermediates? The intermediates synthesized by the process claimed in U.S. Patent 5,731,000 are crucial building blocks for a significant class of cardiovascular drugs. Chemical Structure and Utility The general formula for the compounds covered by the patent is: `O-Ar \| R¹-N-CH₂-CH(OH)-CH₂-O-Ar \| R²` Here, "Ar" represents an aryl group, such as phenyl or substituted phenyl. "R¹" and "R²" are hydrogen or alkyl groups. These 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines are key precursors to beta-adrenergic blocking agents. Beta-blockers are widely prescribed for conditions including: Hypertension (high blood pressure) Angina pectoris (chest pain) Arrhythmias (irregular heartbeats) Heart failure Migraine prophylaxis Glaucoma treatment The synthesis of these APIs often involves further modification of the amine group (R¹ and R²) or the aryl ring (Ar). The efficiency and purity of the intermediate directly impact the cost and quality of the final drug product. Impact on Pharmaceutical Manufacturing The patent's contribution lies in providing a robust and potentially cost-effective method for producing these vital pharmaceutical intermediates. A superior synthetic process can lead to: Reduced manufacturing costs: Higher yields and fewer purification steps translate to lower production expenses. Improved product quality: Greater purity of intermediates minimizes impurities in the final API, which is critical for regulatory approval and patient safety. Streamlined supply chains: A reliable synthesis method ensures a consistent supply of essential drug precursors. What is the Patent Landscape for 3-Aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and Beta-Blockers? The patent landscape surrounding beta-blockers and their synthetic intermediates is mature and complex, characterized by a vast number of patents filed over several decades. Early Patents and Generics The foundational patents for many blockbuster beta-blockers, such as propranolol and atenolol, expired decades ago. This has allowed for the widespread production of generic versions of these drugs, leading to significant price reductions and increased market access. Evolution of Synthesis and New Compounds However, innovation continues in several areas: Improved Synthetic Routes: Companies continuously seek to patent more efficient, greener, or cost-effective synthesis methods for known intermediates and APIs. U.S. Patent 5,731,000 represents one such development in process chemistry. Novel Beta-Blocker Derivatives: Research has led to the development of new beta-blocker molecules with improved pharmacological profiles, such as enhanced selectivity for specific beta-receptor subtypes (e.g., beta-1 selective blockers like metoprolol) or additional vasodilatory properties (e.g., carvedilol). These new compounds are protected by their own distinct patents. Formulations and Delivery Systems: Patents are also filed for novel drug formulations (e.g., extended-release tablets, topical solutions) and innovative drug delivery systems that can improve patient compliance or therapeutic outcomes. Therapeutic Indications: Patents can be granted for new medical uses of existing beta-blocker compounds, expanding their approved applications. Key Players and Patent Activity Major pharmaceutical companies, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck, have historically been significant players in beta-blocker research and development, with extensive patent portfolios. Generic manufacturers also engage in process patenting to find non-infringing routes for producing off-patent APIs. Freedom-to-Operate Considerations For any company looking to manufacture beta-blockers or their intermediates, a thorough freedom-to-operate (FTO) analysis is essential. This involves: Identifying relevant patents: Searching for patents claiming the synthesis process, the chemical compounds themselves, their polymorphs, and their therapeutic uses. Analyzing claim scope: Determining if the proposed manufacturing process or product falls within the scope of existing patent claims. Considering patent expiry: Understanding when patents are set to expire to plan for market entry or continued production. U.S. Patent 5,731,000, issued in 1998, has a nominal life of 20 years from its filing date (assuming it was filed before June 8, 1995, or subject to specific extensions). The filing date for this patent was December 23, 1996. Therefore, its statutory expiration would have been December 23, 2016. However, patent term adjustments (PTA) or extensions (PTE) could alter this date. For a patent filed in 1996, it is likely that its effective term has expired or is about to expire, meaning its process claims are likely no longer in force. This makes the process disclosed in this patent available for use, provided no other blocking patents or regulatory hurdles exist. What are the Potential Implications of this Patent for Competitors? The implications of U.S. Patent 5,731,000 for competitors depend on its current patent status and the specific activities undertaken by those competitors. Impact if Patent is Active If the patent were still in its active term, competitors wishing to use the claimed process would need to: Seek a license: Negotiate a licensing agreement with the patent holder (or its assignee) to legally use the patented process. Design around the patent: Develop an alternative synthesis route that does not infringe on the specific claims of U.S. Patent 5,731,000. This requires careful analysis of the patent's claims and inventive effort to create a non-infringing process. Challenge the patent: If there are grounds for invalidity (e.g., prior art), a competitor might initiate legal proceedings to invalidate the patent. Impact if Patent Has Expired As of the analysis, U.S. Patent 5,731,000 likely expired around 2016-2018, assuming no significant term extensions. For competitors, this means: Freedom to operate for the patented process: The process described in the patent is now in the public domain. Companies can freely utilize the synthesis method without requiring a license or risking infringement related to this specific patent. Focus shifts to other intellectual property: Competitors must still navigate other patents in the landscape, including those covering: New chemical entities (novel beta-blockers). Specific polymorphs or salt forms of APIs. Improved manufacturing processes not covered by this expired patent. New therapeutic uses of beta-blockers. Formulations and delivery systems. This patent's expiration facilitates generic competition and encourages process innovation among manufacturers looking to produce established beta-blocker intermediates. Market Dynamics The availability of an efficient, public-domain synthesis process can: Lower the barrier to entry for generic manufacturers: Reducing manufacturing cost complexity. Intensify price competition: As more entities can use the same process. Encourage further process optimization: Companies may build upon the public knowledge to develop even more advanced or sustainable manufacturing methods. Key Takeaways U.S. Patent 5,731,000 covers a specific chemical process for synthesizing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines, crucial intermediates for beta-blocker drugs. The patent's claims define a reaction sequence involving epichlorohydrin, a phenol, and an amine, aiming for high purity and yield. Given its issuance date of March 24, 1998, the patent likely expired around 2016-2018. This expiration places the disclosed synthetic process in the public domain, allowing for its free utilization by competitors. However, the broader landscape for beta-blockers remains active with patents covering novel compounds, formulations, and alternative synthesis methods, necessitating thorough freedom-to-operate analyses for market entrants. Frequently Asked Questions 1. What specific types of beta-blockers can be synthesized using intermediates from U.S. Patent 5,731,000? The patent covers intermediates that are precursors to a broad class of beta-adrenergic blocking agents. While the patent itself does not name specific final drug products, the 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamine structure is a common pharmacophore found in many beta-blockers, including those with phenyl or substituted phenyl moieties and various amine substitutions. Examples of beta-blockers utilizing similar structural motifs include propranolol, atenolol, metoprolol, and carvedilol. 2. Has the process described in U.S. Patent 5,731,000 been widely adopted by generic manufacturers? Due to the patent's likely expiration, the process is now publicly available. Generic manufacturers are free to adopt it if it proves economically viable and technically superior to alternative routes. The widespread adoption would depend on factors like raw material costs, achievable yields, purity profiles, and the existence of other, still-active blocking patents on specific aspects of the synthesis or its downstream products. 3. Are there any other significant patents covering the synthesis of 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines or related beta-blocker intermediates? Yes, the landscape is extensive. While U.S. Patent 5,731,000 focuses on a particular process, numerous other patents exist covering variations in reagents, reaction conditions, purification techniques, specific intermediates, and novel beta-blocker compounds themselves. Companies often patent improved processes that are non-infringing variations or advancements upon earlier patented methods. 4. What is the difference between a process patent and a compound patent in the context of U.S. Patent 5,731,000? U.S. Patent 5,731,000 is a process patent, meaning it claims a specific method or procedure for making a chemical compound. A compound patent, in contrast, claims the chemical structure of a molecule itself. If a compound patent existed for the intermediates covered by this process patent, using those intermediates, even via a different synthesis route, could still lead to infringement. However, this patent specifically protects the how-to of making the intermediate. 5. What are the implications of patent expiration for the pricing of beta-blocker medications? The expiration of key patents, including process patents like U.S. Patent 5,731,000, allows generic drug manufacturers to enter the market. With increased competition from multiple producers utilizing publicly available synthesis methods, the manufacturing costs can decrease, leading to a significant reduction in the price of the final beta-blocker medications. This enhances affordability and accessibility for patients. Citations [1] Schering Corporation. (1998). U.S. Patent 5,731,000: Process for preparing 3-aryloxy-2-hydroxypropylamines and use thereof. United States Patent and Trademark Office. More… ↓ ⤷ Start Trial

Foriegn Application Priority Data
Foreign Country	Foreign Patent Number	Foreign Patent Date
United Kingdom	9315856	Jul 30, 1993

PCT Information
PCT Filed	July 29, 1994	PCT Application Number:	PCT/GB94/01642
PCT Publication Date:	February 09, 1995	PCT Publication Number:	WO95/03791

Country	Patent Number	Estimated Expiration	Supplementary Protection Certificate	SPC Country	SPC Expiration
Austria	232383	⤷ Start Trial
Australia	698883	⤷ Start Trial
Australia	7235294	⤷ Start Trial
Canada	2168364	⤷ Start Trial
Germany	69432121	⤷ Start Trial
Denmark	0711154	⤷ Start Trial
European Patent Office	0711154	⤷ Start Trial
>Country	>Patent Number	>Estimated Expiration	>Supplementary Protection Certificate	>SPC Country	>SPC Expiration

Details for Patent: 5,731,000

Summary for Patent: 5,731,000