shutterstock_1486264271_jhvephoto
JHVEphoto / Shutterstock.com
20 July 2021Big PharmaAlex Baldwin

PTAB invalidates Medytox Botox patent

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has ruled that a Medytox patent for its wrinkle treatment should not have been granted.

Medytox had proposed amendments to its patent claims, but the board also ruled that the amended claims were unpatentable.

In a final written decision on July 16, Swiss dermatological company Galderma convinced the administrative patent judge to cancel claims 1-10 of US patent number 10,143,728B2 and denied the substitute claims 19-27 proposed by Medytox.

The ‘728 patent, titled “Long Lasting Effect of New Botulinum Toxin Formulation,” outlines the usage of animal-protein-free botulinum toxin (Botox) composition used to reduce wrinkles.

Amended claims

Galderma argued that the amendments were “broader in scope” than the original claims, which the board refused, claiming that the substituted claims “removed ambiguity” found in the original claims.

“We determine that the scope of each of the proposed substitute claims is not improperly broader than the claim for which it is a substitute,” administrative judge Christopher Paulraj wrote.

However, the panel found that the inclusion of the language “50% or greater responder rate” in the revised claim 19 “introduced new subject matter”, therefore did not meet the requirements for the revised motion to amend (MTA).

History

Galderma filed a petition requesting a review of claims 1-10 of the patent in September 2019, which was granted.

Medytox did not file a response to contest the unpatentability claims, instead choosing to file a non-contingent MTA, requesting preliminary guidance on the patentability of the claims In December 2019.

The PTAB issued its preliminary guidance indicating that there was a reasonable likelihood that the claims would be found unpatentable, leading Medytox to file a revised MTA seeking to cancel its original claim 6 and replace the remaining claims with substituted claims 19-27.

The oral hearing was held on March 19, 2021.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Americas
20 April 2015   An Ontario-based company has sued Allergan for allegedly infringing a method patent that protects the use of cosmetic drug Botox to treat back pain.
article
3 May 2022   The US International Trade Commission has agreed to investigate imports of botulinum toxin products following a complaint that they infringe trade secrets.
Big Pharma
29 June 2023   Board did not violate procedure regarding ‘preliminary guidance’ say Federal Circuit judges | Medytox’s substitute claims found to be ‘unpatentable’.

More on this story

Americas
20 April 2015   An Ontario-based company has sued Allergan for allegedly infringing a method patent that protects the use of cosmetic drug Botox to treat back pain.
article
3 May 2022   The US International Trade Commission has agreed to investigate imports of botulinum toxin products following a complaint that they infringe trade secrets.
Big Pharma
29 June 2023   Board did not violate procedure regarding ‘preliminary guidance’ say Federal Circuit judges | Medytox’s substitute claims found to be ‘unpatentable’.

More on this story

Americas
20 April 2015   An Ontario-based company has sued Allergan for allegedly infringing a method patent that protects the use of cosmetic drug Botox to treat back pain.
article
3 May 2022   The US International Trade Commission has agreed to investigate imports of botulinum toxin products following a complaint that they infringe trade secrets.
Big Pharma
29 June 2023   Board did not violate procedure regarding ‘preliminary guidance’ say Federal Circuit judges | Medytox’s substitute claims found to be ‘unpatentable’.