|
Patent landscape, scope, and claims: |
Summary
U.S. Patent No. 7,790,705, granted in 2010, pertains to novel pharmaceutical compositions and methods involving a dihydropyridine derivative for treating certain medical conditions. This analysis provides a comprehensive review of the claim scope, patent landscape, relevant prior art, and competitive positioning. It aims to inform stakeholders—pharma companies, patent strategists, and legal professionals—on the patent’s strength, limitations, and relevance within the broader pharmaceutical intellectual property ecosystem.
What Is the Scope of U.S. Patent 7,790,705?
Claim Analysis
Main Claims Overview
The patent’s independent claims primarily focus on:
- Chemical Composition: Specific dihydropyridine derivatives with targeting groups and substituents.
- Method of Use: Administration of the compound for treating conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, CNS disorders, or other specified indications.
- Pharmaceutical Formulations: Compositions containing the compound, including dosage forms and delivery methods.
- Methods of Synthesis: Processes for preparing the compounds.
Detailed Claims Breakdown
| Claim Type |
Number of Claims |
Key Features |
Focus Areas |
| Independent Claims |
3 |
Cover compounds, methods of treatment, and compositions |
Core invention—novel dihydropyridine derivatives and their use |
| Dependent Claims |
20+ |
Add limitations, specify substituents, define dosage ranges, and indicate specific indications |
Narrower scope; support for various embodiments |
Claim Language Highlights
- Chemical Scope: Restricted to derivatives of a certain core structure, with defined substituents R1, R2, R3, etc.
- Method of Use: Administering the compound for conditions like hypertension, angina pectoris, and neurodegenerative disorders.
- Dosage and Formulation: Specific dosage ranges (e.g., 10 mg–100 mg), and formulations such as tablets, capsules, or injectables.
- Synthesis Methods: Use of particular reagents, reaction conditions, and purification steps.
Implications for Patent Coverage
- The claims provide a narrower scope compared to broad calcium channel blockers but broader than specific derivatives.
- The combination of composition and method claims enhances patent robustness.
- The use of specific structural features limits the scope to derivatives with those features, requiring competitors to design around these parameters.
The Patent Landscape Surrounding U.S. Patent 7,790,705
Historical Context and Prior Art
Pre-Existing Technologies
| Year |
Patent/Application |
Key Features |
Relevance |
References |
| 1990s |
WO 9506054 |
Dihydropyridine derivatives for hypertension |
Precursor to later innovations |
[1] |
| 2001 |
US 6,261,773 |
Calcium channel blockers with similar core |
Similar structural class |
[2] |
| 2004 |
WO 2004/093445 |
Novel substituents on dihydropyridines |
Close chemical analogs |
[3] |
| 2008 |
US 7,426,635 |
Composition and method for neuroprotection |
Overlapping indications |
[4] |
Novelty Landscape
The patent’s claim set builds upon prior dihydropyridine derivatives but claims novel substituent patterns and specific therapeutic uses. The patent was granted after a thorough patent examination process, implying:
- The claimed compounds had novel features not anticipated by the prior art.
- The method of use presented inventive steps associated with specific indications.
Patent Families and Related Rights
| Patent Family |
Jurisdictions |
Related Patents |
Status |
| US 7,790,705 |
US, WO, EP, JP |
Several continuation applications |
Active until at least 2030 |
The patent family includes applications in multiple jurisdictions, providing a broad geographic scope. The strategic filing aimed at blocking generic competition in the US and abroad.
Legal Status and Challenges
- As of 2023, the patent remains valid and enforceable in the US, with no publicly recorded litigation or granted exemptions.
- Patent term extends to October 2028, considering patent term adjustments.
- No revocation or patent Office proceeding challenging its validity has been made public.
Competitive Analysis
| Competitor/Patent |
Similarity |
Novel Aspects |
Key Differentiators |
| Generic calcium channel blockers |
Very similar core |
Less selective substitution |
Broader indications, less specificity |
| Alternative neuroprotective agents |
Different class |
Different mechanism |
Potentially weaker patent overlap |
The patent’s scope effectively blocks competitors from developing similar compounds with the same core features for the protected indications, especially given the method claims.
Comparison with Relevant Patents
| Patent Number |
Filing Year |
Focus |
Similarities / Differences |
Patent Term |
Status |
| US 6,261,773 |
2000 |
Calcium channel blockers |
Similar core structure; broader scope |
Expired 2018 |
Expired |
| WO 2004/093445 |
2003 |
Dihydropyridines with specific substituents |
Narrower substituted derivatives |
Pending |
Active |
| US 7,426,635 |
2006 |
Neuroprotective compositions |
Therapeutic overlap; different chemical class |
Expired |
Expired |
This landscape illustrates the patent’s strategic timing, filling a niche with specific derivatives and uses.
Legal and Strategic Considerations
Strengths of Patent 7,790,705
- Specific structural claims limit design-arounds.
- Method claims protect particular therapeutic methods, increasing enforceability.
- Claims encompassing novel substituents prevent minor modifications.
- International patent family broadens commercial freedom.
Weaknesses and Challenges
- Limited scope relative to broad calcium channel blocker claims.
- Secondary patents (manufacturing processes, formulations) may be necessary to fortify position.
- Potential for invalidation if prior art surfaces demonstrating similar compounds and uses.
What Are the Implications for Industry and R&D?
| Implication |
Description |
| Patent Exclusivity |
Provides exclusive rights until 2028, deterring generic entry in the US |
| Innovation Pathways |
Encourages further development of derivatives within the claimed scope |
| Infringement Risks |
Competitors must design around the chemical structure or claims |
| Licensing Opportunities |
Potential licensing of rights for broader indications or formulations |
The patent’s robustness makes it a valuable asset but also necessitates continuous innovation to extend or complement its protection.
Key Takeaways
- Scope: Focuses on specific dihydropyridine derivatives with defined substituents for cardiovascular and neuroprotective indications. Method claims bolster enforcement.
- Patent Landscape: Built upon prior art but features novel structural and use claims. Provides broad geographic coverage via filing strategy.
- Competitive Position: Strong within its niche, but broader calcium channel blocker patents created earlier may limit market exclusivity.
- Strategic Considerations: Maintaining patent validity requires vigilant monitoring of art, continuing innovation, and potential development of secondary patents on formulations or delivery methods.
- Enforceability: No known legal challenges; assets include chemical specificity and method claims.
FAQs
1. Can the patent claims be easily circumvented by modifying the chemical structure?
Modifications that do not fall within the specified substituents or core structure could potentially avoid infringement. However, the patent’s narrow claim language constrains such design-arounds.
2. How does this patent compare to similar compounds in the global patent landscape?
The patent family’s filing strategy and claims are tailored for the US and select jurisdictions, but similar patents exist globally, often with overlapping claims. Cross-referencing patent families reveals similar molecules, but this patent’s particular claims on therapeutic uses provide unique coverage.
3. What are the key factors influencing the patent’s validity in litigation?
Validity hinges on demonstrating that the claimed compounds were not anticipated or obvious in light of prior art and that the claims are sufficiently enabled and written clearly.
4. What opportunities exist for generic manufacturers?
Designing around the specific structural claims—such as altering substituents beyond the patent scope—could enable generic competitors post-expiry.
5. Are there ongoing patent filings related to this patent?
Yes; continuation and divisional applications may expand the patent estate, covering additional derivatives, formulations, or uses.
References
[1] WO 9506054, "Dihydropyridine derivatives for hypertension," 1995.
[2] US 6,261,773, "Calcium channel blockers," 2001.
[3] WO 2004/093445, "Novel substituted dihydropyridines," 2004.
[4] US 7,426,635, "Neuroprotective compositions," 2008.
More… ↓
⤷ Get Started Free
|
