Scott Nathan is the inventor for the patent no. 5708031 that was issued on Jan. 13, 1998. (http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=5708031) In the application for this patent, Gene Voss's patent was referenced. If you notice the drug and the delivery system and their similarity to the patent by Gene Voss. However, the examiner noted enough material differences between the two to allow the claims for the patent by 5708031.
--------------------------------------------------------
I claim:
1. A method of treating erectile dysfunction in a male patient, comprising the step of administering to the urethra of the patient a
unit dose of a formulation comprising an erectile dysfunction treating amount of a compound having the structural formula: [Figure] or pharmaceutically acceptable salt or ester thereof, together with a pharmaceutically acceptable delivery medium.
2. A method as in claim 1, wherein said administration step further comprises occluding the urethra distally of the formulation to prevent the escape thereof.
3. A method as in claim 1, wherein said formulation further comprises an anesthetic agent.
4. A method as in claim 3, wherein said anesthetic agent comprises lidocaine.
5. A method as in claim 1, wherein said formulation further comprises a lubricating agent.
6. A method as in claim 1, wherein said formulation is in the form of a cream or gel.
7. A method as in claim 1, wherein said formulation is in the form of a suppository.
8. An elongated drug delivery vehicle dimensioned for transurethral insertion, said delivery vehicle containing about 2 cc of a composition comprising an erectile dysfunction treating amount of prostaglandin E2 or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and a delivery medium for the transurethral delivery of said formulation, the amount of prostaglandin E2 being less than about 5.0 mg.
--------------------------------------------------------
Also note the use of the word "transurethral insertion" in claim no. 8. This should make it clear, what is otherwise clear anyway, that the act of inserting some thing like a catheter to deliver or retrieve some thing from urethra is not patentable. What is patentable are certain unique features and characteristics of a particular catheter.
Also, in these patents the delivery systems are tied to what specifically is being delivered. Therefore the two together make a valid patent. The delivery system alone has no patentable value and the same is true for what is being delivered.
I hope this will future help you understand that VVUS does have an inalienable rights to all male urethras of the world, what is inserted in them, and how it is inserted.
More later.
Afaq Sarwar |
