Prior art

The USPTO database search for US patent 12234236 revealed several prior art citations. The provided context includes details from the patent itself and information regarding the ongoing Post-Grant Review (PGR) case PGR2025-00057, which specifically discusses prior art in relation to claims 1 and 24.

Here's an analysis of the most relevant prior art, focusing on the information available and the context of the PGR challenge:

Most Relevant Prior Art

The most relevant prior art explicitly mentioned in the context of the PGR challenge is orforglipron (Eli Lilly & Co.).

• Full Citation: Orforglipron (Eli Lilly & Co.) is frequently referenced in the context of the PGR, specifically in relation to the patent owner's preliminary response and the petitioner's arguments. While a specific patent number for orforglipron isn't provided in the immediate context, its existence and properties are central to the obviousness challenge.
• Publication/Filing Date: By 2023, it was known that orforglipron possessed GLP-1 receptor agonistic activity.
• Brief Description: Orforglipron is described as an orally bioavailable, non-peptidic small-molecule GLP-1R agonist developed by Eli Lilly & Co. It exhibits full agonist efficacy, promoting cAMP accumulation at levels comparable to native GLP-1, with an EC50 of 1.1 nM at both human and cynomolgus monkey GLP-1 receptors. It was structurally optimized for once-daily oral administration, addressing compliance issues associated with injectable therapies for type 2 diabetes and obesity.
• Claims Potentially Anticipated (35 U.S.C. § 102): The petitioner in PGR2025-00057 argues that claims 1 and 24, and potentially other dependent claims (1-9, 12-17, and 21-25), are obvious over prior art including orforglipron. The argument centers on the motivation a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had to modify orforglipron, for example, by replacing a methyl group with a cyclopropyl group, based on teachings from prior art references such as Yoshino, Kawai, and Talele (not fully detailed here, but mentioned in the PGR context).

Other Cited Patent Art (from Google Patents listing for US12234236B1)

The Google Patents page for US12234236B1 lists numerous patent citations. While a full analysis of each is beyond the scope of providing "most relevant" without further detail on their content and specific relevance to the claims, here are a few examples found that are listed as citing US12234236B1, or being cited by it. Please note the distinction between "cited by" and "patent citations" which are typically prior art cited against the patent. The prompt specifically asks for "patent citations for 12234236".

• WO2018056453A1 (Yoshino et al.):

  • Full Citation: WO2018056453A1 - Pyrazolopyridine derivative having glp-1 receptor agonist effect.
  • Publication Date: Published March 29, 2018 (priority date September 14, 2016).
  • Brief Description: This patent describes compounds with an indole ring or a pyrrolo[2,3-b]pyridine ring and a pyrazolopyridine skeleton that act as GLP-1 receptor agonists. It aims to provide compounds with improved activity, metabolic stability, and bioavailability for non-invasive administration in treating type 2 diabetes and obesity.
  • Claims Potentially Anticipated: The PGR mentions "Yoshino" as a reference for motivating modifications to orforglipron. This suggests WO2018056453A1 could potentially be used to demonstrate obviousness of certain structural features or the GLP-1R agonist activity, particularly for claims relating to compounds with similar core structures or therapeutic applications. Since claims 1-9, 12-17, and 21-25 are challenged for obviousness, this reference would likely be considered against those.

• US20230150998A1 (Reeves et al.):

  • Full Citation: US20230150998A1 - Compounds as glp-1r agonists.
  • Publication Date: Published May 11, 2023 (priority date September 27, 2021).
  • Brief Description: This application provides compounds that may be used as GLP-1R agonists, or pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, along with pharmaceutical compositions and methods of their use to treat GLP-1R-mediated diseases. It describes heterocyclic GLP-1 agonists.
  • Claims Potentially Anticipated: Given the similar subject matter of GLP-1R agonists and methods of treatment, this patent application could potentially anticipate or render obvious claims related to the compounds themselves (e.g., claims 1 and 24, and dependent claims) or the therapeutic methods (e.g., method claims discussed in the patent's summary).

• US20220213130A1 (Meng et al.):

  • Full Citation: US20220213130A1 - Heterocyclic glp-1 agonists.
  • Publication Date: Published July 7, 2022 (priority date December 28, 2020).
  • Brief Description: This patent application also describes heterocyclic GLP-1 agonists. It provides definitions for various chemical groups including cycloalkyl and heterocyclyl.
  • Claims Potentially Anticipated: Similar to US20230150998A1, this reference could be used to challenge claims 1 and 24, and related dependent claims, particularly concerning the heterocyclic nature of the compounds and their GLP-1R agonist activity.

Non-Patent Citations (as mentioned in US12291530B1 which cites US12234236B1)

While the prompt specifically asks for patent citations, it's worth noting that non-patent literature is also crucial in prior art analysis. For instance, WO2023220112A1, which cites US12234236B1, mentions the non-patent citation:

• Kawai Takahiro et al. "Structural basis for GLP-1 receptor activation by LY3502970, an orally active nonpeptide agonist" (2020):
  • Publication Date: November 24, 2020.
  • Brief Description: This publication discusses the structural basis for GLP-1 receptor activation by LY3502970, which is an orally active nonpeptide agonist.
  • Claims Potentially Anticipated: This type of publication could provide evidence of the state of the art regarding orally active nonpeptide GLP-1R agonists prior to the priority date of US12234236, potentially impacting claims related to the chemical structures and their activity, contributing to an obviousness argument for claims 1 and 24 and associated dependent claims.