How does the Vanda case relate to the treatment or prophylaxis consideration in Step 2A Prong Two?
The Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Ltd. case is significant in the context of the treatment or prophylaxis consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2): “Vanda Pharm. Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Int’l Ltd., 887 F.3d 1117, 126 USPQ2d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The claims in Vanda recited a method of…
Read MoreWhat types of treatments or prophylaxis are considered in Step 2A Prong Two?
According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2), examples of “treatment” and “prophylaxis” limitations include: Acupuncture Administration of medication Dialysis Organ transplants Phototherapy Physiotherapy Radiation therapy Surgery The MPEP states: “Examples of ‘treatment’ and prophylaxis’ limitations encompass limitations that treat or prevent a disease or medical condition, including, e.g., acupuncture, administration of medication, dialysis, organ transplants, phototherapy, physiotherapy, radiation…
Read MoreHow does “transformation” relate to particular treatment in patent claims?
The concept of “transformation” is closely related to particular treatment in patent claims, as discussed in MPEP 2106.04(d)(2). The MPEP states: “[A] treatment or prophylaxis limitation encompasses more than just the step of ‘administering’ a medication or therapy. For example, ‘administering a medication’ to a patient may also include the steps of determining the appropriate…
Read MoreHow can a treatment or prophylaxis limitation qualify for consideration in Step 2A Prong Two?
For a treatment or prophylaxis limitation to qualify for consideration in Step 2A Prong Two, it must meet certain criteria. According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2): “Examiners should keep in mind that in order to qualify as a ‘treatment’ or ‘prophylaxis’ limitation for purposes of this consideration, the claim limitation in question must affirmatively recite an action…
Read MoreWhat role does “prophylaxis” play in Step 2A Prong Two analysis?
Prophylaxis, or preventive treatment, plays a significant role in the Step 2A Prong Two analysis as outlined in MPEP 2106.04(d)(2). The MPEP states: “[A] claim directed to a prophylaxis or treatment can integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application by applying or using the judicial exception to effect a particular prophylaxis or treatment…
Read MoreWhat is the “particular treatment or prophylaxis” consideration in Step 2A Prong Two?
The “particular treatment or prophylaxis” consideration is a way to demonstrate that a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application. According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2), “One way to demonstrate such integration is when the additional elements apply or use the recited judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or…
Read MoreWhat factors are considered when evaluating a treatment or prophylaxis limitation in Step 2A Prong Two?
According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2), there are three main factors to consider when evaluating a treatment or prophylaxis limitation in Step 2A Prong Two: The particularity or generality of the treatment or prophylaxis: The limitation must be “particular,” i.e., specifically identified so that it does not encompass all applications of the judicial exception(s). Whether the limitation(s)…
Read MoreWhat are examples of “particular” treatments in patent claims?
According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2), examples of “particular” treatments in patent claims include: Administering a lower than normal dosage of a beta blocker medication to a patient with congestive heart failure Treating a patient with a specific compound at a specific dose and schedule Using nicotinamide to treat Parkinson’s Disease Administering rapamycin to treat cancer These…
Read MoreWhat are examples of claims that do not integrate a judicial exception through treatment?
The MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) provides examples of claims that do not integrate a judicial exception through treatment. These include: Insignificant extra-solution activity: “For example, a claim reciting the step of ‘administering a drug providing 6-thioguanine to a patient’ (without more) is not a meaningful limitation.” General treatment: “For example, consider a claim that recites mentally analyzing…
Read MoreHow does MPEP distinguish between “particular” and “general” treatments?
The MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) provides guidance on distinguishing between “particular” and “general” treatments: “[T]reatments that are ‘particular,’ i.e., specifically identified so that they do not encompass all applications of the judicial exception, are considered to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.” In contrast, general treatments are those that are not specific or targeted. The…
Read More