Revitalizing the patent system to incentivize pharmaceutical innovation: the potential of claims with means-plus-function clauses.

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Duke Law Journal Pub Date : 2013-02-01
Wanli Lily Tang
{"title":"Revitalizing the patent system to incentivize pharmaceutical innovation: the potential of claims with means-plus-function clauses.","authors":"Wanli Lily Tang","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The pharmaceutical industry relies on innovation. However, many innovative firms are cutting their research and development investments and seeing their new product pipelines dry up, due in part to a lack of sufficient patent protection. This Note identifies two major factors that have caused this inadequacy in patent protection. First, pharmaceutical patents are challenged early and often by generic manufacturers, as encouraged by the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act. Second, the scope of pharmaceutical-patents is sometimes unduly restrained due to limited application of the doctrine of equivalents. Consequently, pharmaceutical patents, especially drug-product patents, are easily designed around and cannot offer the protection necessary for innovative firms to recoup their developmental costs. This Note argues for a wider application of means-plus-function clauses in pharmaceutical patents as a potential cure for this problem. Means-plus-function claims, although authorized by Congress in the 1952 Patent Act, have not been explored much in the pharmaceutical context. This Note argues that this claiming strategy is not only appropriate but also particularly effective for pharmaceutical patents. Means-plus-function claims would give drug-product patents adequate scope even with the limited use of the doctrine of equivalents and thus would provide the protection necessary for innovative firms to withstand frequent attacks by generic manufacturers. Finally, this Note examines issues anticipated with applying means-plus-function claims to pharmaceutical patents and proposes possible solutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47625,"journal":{"name":"Duke Law Journal","volume":"62 5","pages":"1069-108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Duke Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The pharmaceutical industry relies on innovation. However, many innovative firms are cutting their research and development investments and seeing their new product pipelines dry up, due in part to a lack of sufficient patent protection. This Note identifies two major factors that have caused this inadequacy in patent protection. First, pharmaceutical patents are challenged early and often by generic manufacturers, as encouraged by the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act. Second, the scope of pharmaceutical-patents is sometimes unduly restrained due to limited application of the doctrine of equivalents. Consequently, pharmaceutical patents, especially drug-product patents, are easily designed around and cannot offer the protection necessary for innovative firms to recoup their developmental costs. This Note argues for a wider application of means-plus-function clauses in pharmaceutical patents as a potential cure for this problem. Means-plus-function claims, although authorized by Congress in the 1952 Patent Act, have not been explored much in the pharmaceutical context. This Note argues that this claiming strategy is not only appropriate but also particularly effective for pharmaceutical patents. Means-plus-function claims would give drug-product patents adequate scope even with the limited use of the doctrine of equivalents and thus would provide the protection necessary for innovative firms to withstand frequent attacks by generic manufacturers. Finally, this Note examines issues anticipated with applying means-plus-function claims to pharmaceutical patents and proposes possible solutions.

振兴专利制度以激励医药创新:手段加功能条款的权利要求的潜力。
制药业依赖于创新。然而,由于缺乏足够的专利保护,许多创新型公司正在削减他们的研发投资,并看到他们的新产品管道枯竭。本说明确定了导致专利保护不足的两个主要因素。首先,药品专利很早就受到仿制药制造商的挑战,而且经常受到挑战,1984年《哈奇-韦克斯曼法案》(Hatch-Waxman Act)鼓励了这一点。其次,药品专利的范围有时由于等同原则的有限应用而受到不适当的限制。因此,药品专利,特别是药品专利,很容易被设计出来,不能为创新公司提供必要的保护,以收回其开发成本。本说明主张在药品专利中更广泛地应用手段加功能条款,作为解决这一问题的潜在办法。手段加功能的权利要求虽然在1952年的《专利法》中得到了国会的授权,但在制药领域却没有得到太多的探索。本说明认为,这种权利要求策略不仅适用,而且对药品专利特别有效。手段加功能权利要求将给予药品专利足够的范围,即使在有限使用等同原则的情况下,因此将为创新公司提供必要的保护,以抵御仿制药制造商的频繁攻击。最后,本说明审查了将手段加功能权利要求应用于药物专利所预期的问题,并提出了可能的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The first issue of what was to become the Duke Law Journal was published in March 1951 as the Duke Bar Journal. Created to provide a medium for student expression, the Duke Bar Journal consisted entirely of student-written and student-edited work until 1953, when it began publishing faculty contributions. To reflect the inclusion of faculty scholarship, the Duke Bar Journal became the Duke Law Journal in 1957. In 1969, the Journal published its inaugural Administrative Law Symposium issue, a tradition that continues today. Volume 1 of the Duke Bar Journal spanned two issues and 259 pages. In 1959, the Journal grew to four issues and 649 pages, growing again in 1970 to six issues and 1263 pages. Today, the Duke Law Journal publishes eight issues per volume. Our staff is committed to the purpose set forth in our constitution: to publish legal writing of superior quality. We seek to publish a collection of outstanding scholarship from established legal writers, up-and-coming authors, and our own student editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信