US Patent 9,724,358: Scope, Claims, Expiration, and Omadacycline Patent Landscape

US Patent 9,724,358 protects a clinical-use regimen for intravenous omadacycline, formerly described as 9-[(2,2-dimethyl-propylamino)-methyl]-minocycline, in complicated skin and skin structure infections. The patent does not broadly claim omadacycline, its chemical composition, or every use of the drug. Its core protection combines five elements: treatment of a human subject, complicated skin and skin structure infection, intravenous administration, omadacycline or a specified salt, and mild gastrointestinal adverse events.

The patent is commercially relevant to Nuzyra, the omadacycline product marketed by Paratek Pharmaceuticals and licensed commercially to Zai Lab in China. The patent’s practical value depends on whether a competing product uses the claimed intravenous regimen and whether the clinical evidence satisfies the “mild” gastrointestinal adverse-event limitation.

What drug does US Patent 9,724,358 protect?

The claimed active ingredient is omadacycline, a semisynthetic aminomethylcycline related to minocycline. The compound is marketed in the United States as Nuzyra.

Item	Detail
Patent	US 9,724,358 B2
Patent type	Method of treatment
Active ingredient	Omadacycline
Chemical description	9-[(2,2-dimethyl-propylamino)-methyl]-minocycline
Primary indication	Complicated skin and skin structure infections
Administration	Intravenous administration, with certain claims covering subsequent oral treatment
Key dosage	About 50 mg to about 150 mg per day; dependent claim 7 specifies about 100 mg per day
Key clinical limitation	Gastrointestinal adverse events are mild and, under claim 20, do not result in treatment discontinuation
Patent holder or applicant family	Paratek-related entities
FDA product	Nuzyra
FDA approval for cSSSI	October 2, 2018

The patent is a use patent. It does not independently establish composition-of-matter protection for omadacycline. Composition, formulation, salt, manufacturing, and other therapeutic-use patents must be analyzed separately.

What is the core scope of claim 1?

Claim 1 requires the following limitations:

A human subject.
Treatment for complicated skin and skin structure infections.
Intravenous administration.
An effective amount of omadacycline or a salt.
Treatment of the subject.
Gastrointestinal adverse events associated with treatment are mild.

The claim is narrower than a conventional method claim that would merely recite administering omadacycline for an infection. The GI adverse-event limitation is material. A potential infringement analysis would need to address whether the accused regimen produces mild GI adverse events as a clinical characteristic of the treatment.

The phrase “such that said subject is treated” is likely to carry little independent limiting force. It confirms the therapeutic objective but does not impose a separate numerical efficacy threshold. Claims 8 and 9 introduce more specific efficacy limitations.

Claim construction issues

Several terms are likely to matter in litigation:

“Complicated skin and skin structure infections” may be interpreted by reference to the clinical meaning used in the relevant development program and FDA labeling.
“Effective amount” generally requires a dose capable of producing the claimed therapeutic result.
“Mild” gastrointestinal adverse events is a severity limitation. The patent specification, clinical-trial definitions, and regulatory safety data would be important to its construction.
“Associated with treatment” creates a causation or attribution issue. The limitation may not require every patient to experience GI events, but it requires the treatment-associated events to be mild.
“Intravenously administering” distinguishes the independent claim from an oral-only regimen.
The active ingredient may be present as a free base or as one of the salts expressly covered by dependent claims 2 and 3.

What do claims 2 through 20 add?

The dependent claims create narrower fall-back positions around salt form, patient population, dose, pathogens, clinical response, dosing frequency, treatment duration, and tolerability.

Claims	Added limitation	Commercial significance
2	Hydrochloride salt	Covers a specific omadacycline salt
3	Tosylate salt	Covers another specified salt
4-5	Injury, major abscess, cellulitis; traumatic injury	Narrows the infection population
6	IV dose of about 50 mg to about 150 mg per day	Captures the principal dose range
7	About 100 mg per day	Targets the principal daily dose
8	Clinical success rate greater than about 93.2%	Adds a quantitative efficacy result
9	Microbiologically evaluable clinical success rate greater than about 93.7%	Adds a narrower efficacy endpoint
10-13	Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococci, MRSA, MSSA, beta Streptococci, or S. pyogenes	Covers important cSSSI pathogens
14	Erythema, edema, or induration	Defines clinical signs of infection
15	Once-daily administration	Covers a commercially useful dosing schedule
16	IV administration followed by oral administration	Covers IV-to-oral step-down treatment
17	Total treatment up to about 7, 8, 9, 10, or 14 days	Defines treatment duration
18	Up to 7 days IV followed by about 1 or 2 weeks oral treatment	Covers staged therapy
19	About 4 days IV and approximately 10 days total treatment	Targets a specific clinical regimen
20	GI adverse events do not result in discontinuation	Strengthens the tolerability limitation

Claims 6, 7, 15, 17, 18, and 19 are particularly relevant to a generic or follow-on product because they map onto a standard hospital regimen: once-daily intravenous dosing, followed by oral therapy, for a total course of approximately 7 to 14 days.

What formulations are protected by US Patent 9,724,358?

The patent directly identifies hydrochloride and tosylate salts in claims 2 and 3. The independent claim also covers “a salt thereof,” which may provide broader salt coverage than the two expressly named dependent claims, subject to the written description and claim-construction record.

The patent does not appear, from the supplied claims, to claim:

A particular excipient system;
A specific vial or reconstitution formulation;
A particular particle-size distribution;
A defined pH range;
A lyophilized composition;
A specific oral tablet or capsule formulation;
A manufacturing process;
A crystalline polymorph;
A composition containing a defined percentage of omadacycline.

Those subjects would ordinarily be addressed by separate formulation, solid-state, composition, or manufacturing patents.

A competitor could therefore avoid some dependent claims by using a different salt, if the independent claim and the specification do not support that salt in the relevant scope. That strategy would not avoid claim 1 if the alternative salt remains within “a salt thereof” and the remaining limitations are met.

When does US Patent 9,724,358 expire?

US Patent 9,724,358 issued on August 8, 2017. Its term is governed by the 20-year patent-term rule measured from the applicable earliest nonprovisional filing date, subject to patent-term adjustment, terminal disclaimers, and any other term-specific correction.

The patent is generally associated with an expiration in approximately 2031. The exact enforceable expiration date should be confirmed against the USPTO Patent Center record and the Orange Book patent listing, including any patent-term adjustment.

The patent’s 2031-era term is separate from FDA regulatory exclusivity:

Exclusivity or protection	Relevant date
Nuzyra FDA approval	October 2, 2018
Five-year new chemical entity exclusivity	Approximately October 2, 2023
QIDP-related additional exclusivity	Potentially extends qualifying exclusivity by five years, subject to statutory treatment
US 9,724,358 patent term	Approximately 2031, subject to official term calculation

QIDP status can extend applicable FDA exclusivity and certain patent terms for qualifying products. It does not convert a method-of-use patent into composition-of-matter protection and does not prevent an ANDA applicant from challenging patent validity or noninfringement through the Paragraph IV process once statutory exclusivity barriers are satisfied.

What is the Orange Book status of US Patent 9,724,358?

US Patent 9,724,358 is relevant to Nuzyra’s FDA-approved cSSSI indication because its claims track the intravenous cSSSI regimen reflected in the product’s clinical development and labeling.

The Orange Book analysis must distinguish between:

Patents listed for the active ingredient;
Formulation patents;
Method-of-use patents;
Patents with FDA-recognized use codes;
Patents that remain unexpired;
Patents that have been delisted, expired, or superseded.

A listed method-of-use patent can trigger a Paragraph IV certification when an ANDA applicant seeks approval for a use covered by the listed patent. The patent does not necessarily block approval of an ANDA that omits the patented indication through a section viii statement, provided the remaining labeling does not induce infringement.

For this patent, the principal regulatory risk is an ANDA seeking approval for intravenous omadacycline for cSSSI, especially if the proposed labeling includes once-daily IV dosing, a 100 mg daily regimen, or IV-to-oral step-down therapy.

How strong is the patent estate for omadacycline?

The estate is stronger when analyzed as a portfolio than when US 9,724,358 is viewed alone.

Patent category	Protection sought	Relevance to generic entry
Composition of matter	Omadacycline molecule and related compounds	Usually the strongest barrier if unexpired
Salt and solid-state patents	Hydrochloride, tosylate, polymorphs, crystalline forms	Can complicate formulation design
Formulation patents	Injectable and oral dosage forms	Relevant to ANDA product design
Method-of-use patents	cSSSI, community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, other infections	Can require label carving or Paragraph IV litigation
Dosing patents	Once-daily IV, IV-to-oral transition, treatment duration	Targets clinical use and product labeling
Manufacturing patents	Synthesis, purification, and process controls	More relevant to supply and API sourcing
Regulatory exclusivity	NCE and QIDP periods	Can delay ANDA approval independently of patent validity

US 9,724,358 is commercially meaningful because it covers a defined hospital-use regimen rather than an abstract therapeutic concept. Its strength is reduced by the number of factual limitations that must be proven. A challenger could contest the construction or proof of:

“Mild” GI adverse events;
The relationship between the adverse events and treatment;
Whether the accused patient population has complicated skin and skin structure infections;
Whether an accused regimen is intravenous;
Whether the dose and duration fall within the claimed ranges;
Whether the reported efficacy exceeds the numerical thresholds in claims 8 and 9.

Claims 2 through 20 provide narrower positions, but each additional limitation also creates more noninfringement avenues.

What Paragraph IV challenges could target Nuzyra?

An ANDA applicant challenging Nuzyra patents would typically certify under Paragraph IV that one or more listed patents are invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed. For US 9,724,358, likely theories include:

Noninfringement

A challenger could design or label its product to avoid one or more elements, such as:

Oral-only treatment;
A use limited to an indication outside cSSSI;
No IV-to-oral regimen in labeling;
A dose outside the claimed range;
A formulation using a salt or form outside the asserted claim scope;
A label that does not recommend the patented duration or treatment sequence.

Avoiding the GI limitation may be more difficult if the product is pharmacologically equivalent and clinical data show the same tolerability profile. It may still be possible to argue that the claim requires a particular clinical result not established by the proposed labeling.

Invalidity

Potential invalidity arguments could address:

Anticipation by prior clinical disclosures of intravenous omadacycline for cSSSI;
Obviousness based on earlier minocycline, aminomethylcycline, and cSSSI treatment disclosures;
Written-description support for the broad “mild” GI adverse-event limitation;
Enablement across all claimed doses, salts, pathogens, patient types, and treatment durations;
Indefiniteness of “mild” and “associated with treatment”;
Indefiniteness or enablement issues involving the numerical success-rate limitations.

The clinical-results limitations in claims 8 and 9 may provide narrower protection but can create written-description and enablement questions if the disclosed trial data do not support the full breadth of the claim language.

What patent litigation affects US 9,724,358?

The supplied claims do not establish whether a particular ANDA litigation proceeding has been filed, settled, dismissed, or resolved. Patent litigation status must be determined from the relevant federal district court docket, Federal Circuit decisions, USPTO records, and FDA Orange Book updates.

A litigation assessment should examine:

Whether a Paragraph IV notice was served for US 9,724,358.
Whether Paratek or another listed patent owner filed an action within 45 days.
Whether a 30-month stay was triggered.
Whether the case involved claim construction of “mild” GI adverse events.
Whether the case ended in a license, launch-at-risk settlement, consent judgment, or invalidity decision.
Whether the asserted claims were narrowed, canceled, or disclaimed.

A settlement involving one Nuzyra patent would not automatically resolve every patent in the portfolio. Product launch timing would depend on the settlement’s licensed date, the status of other Orange Book patents, regulatory exclusivity, and any covenants not to sue.

Which companies are challenging or competing with Nuzyra?

The competitive field includes generic tetracyclines, branded antibiotics, and potential generic or authorized-generic entrants.

Product or class	Company category	Competitive relationship
Nuzyra, omadacycline	Paratek; commercial partners	Reference product
Minocycline	Multiple generic manufacturers	Lower-cost tetracycline alternative
Doxycycline	Multiple generic manufacturers	Broad outpatient and infection competition
Tigecycline	Generic and branded suppliers	IV tetracycline-class competitor
Linezolid	Generic and branded suppliers	MRSA and cSSSI alternative
Vancomycin	Multiple manufacturers	Hospital MRSA alternative
Dalbavancin and oritavancin	Branded and generic-development competitors	Long-acting IV Gram-positive therapy
Ceftaroline	Branded/generic-development competitors	MRSA-active beta-lactam alternative

These products do not necessarily infringe US 9,724,358 because the patent claims require omadacycline. Their commercial effect is competitive rather than patent-based.

What generic launch risks exist?

A generic launch before the patent’s approximate 2031 expiration would face several possible barriers:

Patent litigation after a Paragraph IV certification;
A 30-month statutory stay;
Additional unexpired Nuzyra patents;
FDA exclusivity or QIDP-related protection;
Difficulty designing a label that avoids the patented cSSSI use;
Potential induced-infringement allegations based on product labeling;
Separate formulation or composition patents;
Supply constraints involving qualified omadacycline API.

The most plausible noninfringing launch scenario would involve a product with an indication carve-out that excludes cSSSI or excludes the patented IV-to-oral regimen. That strategy would reduce patent exposure but also reduce the product’s addressable market.

A full-label launch for IV cSSSI would present materially higher risk because it would likely practice the central limitations of claim 1 and several dependent claims.

What manufacturing and geographic barriers apply?

The patent is a United States right. It does not directly block manufacturing, sale, or use outside the United States. Parallel patent families may protect the compound, salts, formulations, or methods in Europe, China, Japan, Canada, and other markets.

Manufacturing risk may arise from separate patents covering:

Omadacycline synthesis;
Aminomethylation steps;
Protected intermediates;
Salt formation;
Purification;
Crystalline forms;
Injectable formulation and stability;
Oral formulation and dissolution.

A manufacturer could avoid US 9,724,358 by producing omadacycline for a non-US market or for a non-cSSSI use, but it could still face other US patents if the product enters the US supply chain.

How does US 9,724,358 compare with a composition patent?

A composition-of-matter patent generally has broader commercial effect because it can cover the active molecule regardless of indication, dose, route, or patient population. US 9,724,358 is narrower but directly aligned with the approved IV cSSSI use.

Issue	Composition patent	US 9,724,358
Covers molecule itself	Yes, if properly drafted	No
Covers all indications	Usually broader	No
Requires IV administration	No	Yes
Requires cSSSI	No	Yes
Requires clinical tolerability result	Usually no	Yes
Easier infringement proof	Generally yes	More fact-intensive
Potential label carve-out	Limited	More feasible
Commercial relevance to hospital cSSSI	High	High

What is the likely revenue exposure?

The patent’s revenue exposure is concentrated in hospital and outpatient treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections using IV omadacycline, particularly:

MRSA infections;
MSSA infections;
Streptococcal infections;
Cellulitis;
Major abscesses;
Traumatic-injury infections;
Patients requiring initial IV therapy followed by oral step-down treatment.

The claims do not cover all Nuzyra revenue. Nuzyra is also approved for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, and separate patent and regulatory protections may apply to that indication.

Revenue exposure depends on the portion of sales attributable to cSSSI, the timing of generic entry, the number of additional unexpired patents, payer substitution, hospital formulary decisions, and whether a generic entrant launches with a carved-out label.

Key Takeaways

US 9,724,358 is a method-of-treatment patent covering IV omadacycline for complicated skin and skin structure infections.
Its central limitation is that treatment-associated GI adverse events are mild.
Dependent claims cover hydrochloride and tosylate salts, a 50-150 mg daily IV dose, approximately 100 mg daily dosing, once-daily administration, pathogens including MRSA and MSSA, and IV-to-oral step-down therapy.
Claims 8 and 9 add clinical success-rate thresholds above approximately 93.2% and 93.7%.
The patent does not, by itself, broadly protect the omadacycline molecule, all formulations, or all uses.
The patent issued on August 8, 2017 and is generally associated with expiration in approximately 2031, subject to the official patent-term calculation.
Paragraph IV challenges would likely focus on claim construction, clinical-result limitations, obviousness, enablement, written description, and label-based noninfringement.
A carved-out generic label could reduce infringement risk but would limit access to the patented cSSSI market.
The commercial strength of the patent depends on the broader Nuzyra portfolio, including composition, formulation, manufacturing, dosing, and other method-of-use patents.

FAQs

Does US 9,724,358 cover oral omadacycline by itself?

No. The independent claim requires intravenous administration. Claims 16 through 19 cover an IV regimen followed by oral administration, but the claims do not cover an oral-only cSSSI regimen standing alone.

Does the patent cover every omadacycline salt?

Claim 1 refers to omadacycline “or a salt thereof,” while claims 2 and 3 expressly identify hydrochloride and tosylate salts. The enforceable scope for other salts would depend on claim construction and written-description support.

Can a generic sell omadacycline for pneumonia before this patent expires?

Potentially, if the product labeling and conduct avoid the patented cSSSI use and no separate patent blocks the pneumonia indication. US 9,724,358 is directed to complicated skin and skin structure infections.

Why are claims 8 and 9 commercially important?

They tie narrower patent protection to clinical success rates above approximately 93.2% and 93.7%. Those claims may support enforcement against a regimen producing the specified outcomes, but they also create proof and claim-construction issues.

Does FDA approval prove infringement of US 9,724,358?

No. FDA approval addresses safety, efficacy, quality, and labeling. Patent infringement depends on whether the approved product and proposed use practice every limitation of an asserted patent claim.

References

Food and Drug Administration. (2018, October 2). FDA approves new antibiotic to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations: Orange Book. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2017). U.S. Patent No. 9,724,358: Methods of treating skin and skin structure infections. U.S. Department of Commerce.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2018). Nuzyra prescribing information. Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
United States Code. (2024). 35 U.S.C. §§ 154, 271, and 355.

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Patented / Exclusive Use	Submissiondate
Paratek Pharms	NUZYRA	omadacycline tosylate	POWDER;INTRAVENOUS	209817-001	Oct 2, 2018		RX	Yes	Yes	⤷ Start Trial	⤷ Start Trial				TREATMENT OF BACTERIAL SKIN AND SKIN STRUCTURE INFECTIONS	⤷ Start Trial
Paratek Pharms	NUZYRA	omadacycline tosylate	TABLET;ORAL	209816-001	Oct 2, 2018		RX	Yes	Yes	⤷ Start Trial	⤷ Start Trial				TREATMENT OF BACTERIAL SKIN AND SKIN STRUCTURE INFECTIONS	⤷ Start Trial
>Applicant	>Tradename	>Generic Name	>Dosage	>NDA	>Approval Date	>TE	>Type	>RLD	>RS	>Patent No.	>Patent Expiration	>Product	>Substance	>Delist Req.	>Patented / Exclusive Use	>Submissiondate

Country	Patent Number	Estimated Expiration	Supplementary Protection Certificate	SPC Country	SPC Expiration
Australia	2009220171	⤷ Start Trial
Brazil	PI0908951	⤷ Start Trial
Canada	2717703	⤷ Start Trial
>Country	>Patent Number	>Estimated Expiration	>Supplementary Protection Certificate	>SPC Country	>SPC Expiration

Details for Patent: 9,724,358

Which drugs does patent 9,724,358 protect, and when does it expire?

Summary for Patent: 9,724,358