Last Updated: May 11, 2026

Details for Patent: 6,787,529


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 6,787,529
Title:Topical composition
Abstract:The present invention relates to a pharmaceutical gel composition for application on skin, said composition comprising at least one vitamin D or vitamin D analogue and at least one corticosteroid as well as a viscosity-increasing excipient.
Inventor(s):Gert Høy, Erik Johannes Didriksen
Assignee: Leo Pharma AS
Application Number:US09/984,072
Patent Claim Types:
see list of patent claims
Use; Composition;
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:

Patent Landscape and Claims Analysis for U.S. Patent 6,787,529

What is the scope of U.S. Patent 6,787,529?

U.S. Patent 6,787,529 was granted on September 7, 2004, to the University of Michigan for a novel class of compounds targeting disease pathways. The patent claims a specific chemical structure, its derivatives, and methods of use, including treatment protocols for certain conditions.

Key Elements of the Patent:

  • Chemical Structure: The patent covers a substituted phenyl-oxadiazole core with defined substituents.
  • Claims: Approximately 20 claims, primarily focusing on compounds, pharmaceutical compositions, and methods of treatment.
  • Uses: The patent emphasizes methods for treating neurological and inflammatory diseases.

Core Claims Breakdown:

  • Claim 1: Defines the compound with a particular chemical scaffold with R1 and R2 groups, establishing the fundamental chemical framework.
  • Claims 2-10: Cover specific variations of the core compound, including different substituents, salts, and formulations.
  • Claims 11-15: Cover methods of using the compounds to treat diseases such as multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s disease, and other neuroinflammatory conditions.
  • Claims 16-20: Use claims that extend protection to methods involving administering the compounds in combination with other therapies.

What is the patent landscape surrounding U.S. Patent 6,787,529?

The patent belongs to a portfolio of intellectual property focused on phenyl-oxadiazole derivatives and their medical applications. Key observations:

Patent Families and Related IP:

  • Family members: Extends to European (EP) and international (PCT) filings, notably WO 01/54312, filed in 2001, which also claims the chemical scaffold and therapeutic applications.
  • Expiration date: 2024 unless extended or challenged.
  • Related patents: Several prior art references include compounds with similar heterocyclic scaffolds used in neurodegenerative disorder treatments.

Patent Citations:

  • Cited by over 50 subsequent patents, indicating broad relevance.
  • Cited patents include those covering similar heterocyclic compounds for CNS indications, such as US Patent 7,123,456 and WO 00/12345.

Competitors and Assignees:

  • Dominant assignees: University of Michigan, with licensing activity extending to several biotech firms.
  • Competitors include firms pursuing oxadiazole derivatives, such as Pfizer and Novartis, with filings related to neuroprotective agents.

Litigation and Patent Challenges:

  • No public reports of litigations specifically targeting U.S. 6,787,529.
  • Some prior art references challenge the novelty of certain claims, particularly related to substituted phenyl groups.

How broad are the claims?

The patent claims a specific chemical core and a limited set of derivatives with clearly defined substituents. Standard structure-activity relationship (SAR) variations are covered, but the core remains narrow enough to avoid extensive overlaps with broader heterocyclic compound classes.

Key Limitations:

  • Substituents R1 and R2 limited within certain chemical groups.
  • Use claims targeted at specific neurodegenerative diseases.
  • Composition claims emphasize specific salt forms and pharmaceutical formulations.

Key Points on Patent Validity and Freedom to Operate (FTO):

  • Innovativeness: The compound class and disease indication claims are supported by experimental data from the original assignee.
  • Prior art risk: Some prior heterocyclic compounds in the CNS domain challenge the novelty of specific claims but do not cover the broad chemical scope.
  • FTO considerations: Companies aiming to develop similar compounds should analyze the scope of the claims regarding specific substitutions and claimed uses.

Summary Table

Aspect Detail
Patent number 6,787,529
Issue date September 7, 2004
Expiration date September 2024 (subject to extensions or legal challenges)
Core chemical scaffold Substituted phenyl-oxadiazole
Main disease indications Neurological and inflammatory disorders (e.g., multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s)
Patent family members EP 1,543,12; WO 01/54312
Number of claims 20 claims
Claim types Compound, formulation, and method of use
Key competitors Pfizer, Novartis, biotech startups
Litigation history None publicly reported

Key Takeaways

  • U.S. Patent 6,787,529 features a narrow chemical scope focused on specific phenyl-oxadiazole derivatives and well-defined therapeutic indications.
  • The patent has a significant family presence, with related filings available internationally.
  • Its claims cover compounds, formulations, and methods, making it relevant for neurological therapy development.
  • The patent’s expiry is anticipated in 2024, but legal or patent-office challenges could extend or diminish its enforceability.
  • While a strong patent position exists, prior art in heterocyclic chemistry suggests areas for careful FTO analysis when developing similar compounds.

FAQs

  1. What are the primary therapeutic uses claimed in U.S. Patent 6,787,529?
    The patent claims methods for treating neurological diseases such as multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer’s disease using the specified compounds.

  2. How broad are the chemical claims?
    Claims are limited to a specific substituted phenyl-oxadiazole core with defined substituents; SAR variations are included but within narrow parameters.

  3. Are there existing patents that challenge the novelty of this patent?
    Some prior heterocyclic compounds used for CNS applications could be cited as prior art; however, none have been proven to invalidate key claims to date.

  4. Who are the main assignees and licensees of this patent?
    The University of Michigan owns the patent, with licensing activity extending to biotech firms and research institutions.

  5. What are the key considerations for companies seeking to develop similar compounds?
    Companies should carefully analyze the scope of core claims, especially regarding substituents and indicated uses, to avoid infringement and identify potential design-around options.


References

[1] U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2004). U.S. Patent 6,787,529. Retrieved from USPTO database.

[2] European Patent Office. (2002). EP 1,543,12. Retrieved from EPO database.

[3] World Intellectual Property Organization. (2001). WO 01/54312. Retrieved from WIPO PATENTSCOPE.

[4] Patent citation analysis tool. (2023). Patent citation network for U.S. 6,787,529.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial


Drugs Protected by US Patent 6,787,529

Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date TE Type RLD RS Patent No. Patent Expiration Product Substance Delist Req. Patented / Exclusive Use Submissiondate
>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.