Invalidity dossier
US 8759320
Added 10/31/2026, 12:00:44 AM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
US 8,759,320 B2 — Patent Overview
Title: Process for the preparation of trivalent iron complexes with mono-, di- and polysaccharide sugars
Assignee: Biofer SpA (original assignee Biofer SpA). Inventors: Stefania Sacchi, Mauro Montorsi, Egidio Marchi.
Key dates (per the supplied record): Priority date 2005-03-15; application filed 2006-03-14; pre-grant publication US20080207558A1 on 2008-08-28; patent granted/publication 2014-06-24. The supplied text lists "adjusted expiration 2028-08-03."
Purpose: The invention concerns synthesis of trivalent iron (III) complexes with mono-, di- and polysaccharide sugars. The text states the products obtainable can include iron gluconate, iron polymaltose, iron dextran, iron saccharate stabilized with sucrose, or novel complexes such as iron lactate. These complexes are described as intended for oral, intramuscular or intravenous administration to patients or animals for preventing or treating iron-deficiency pathologies.
Plain-language scope (from the background/definitions text): The stated aim is a reproducible process for forming stable Fe(III)–sugar complexes. The text emphasizes three conditions:
- The ferric hydroxide must be homogeneous, uncharged, and not partly salified with anions (e.g., Fe(OH)₂Cl), since mixed hydroxides hinder complex formation and reduce stability.
- The sugar must be "activated," meaning the aldehyde/hemiacetal end group is converted to a stable group—suitably an alcohol (reduction) or carboxy group (oxidation)—so it cannot reduce Fe(III) to the more toxic Fe(II).
- For polysaccharides, very low molecular-weight fractions must be avoided (risk of gelation/precipitation), while very high molecular weights (especially dextran) can cause anaphylactic shock.
The text criticizes prior methods (citing BE 787662 and DK 129353) where unactivated sugars undergo uncontrolled hydrolysis/dismutation in basic conditions, yielding mixtures.
What the excerpt does not establish: It was truncated mid-discussion of DK 129353 and contains no claim language, examples, or working parameters. It does not establish the exact claim scope, the specific process steps protected, or the validity/status of the patent. (Litigation and assignment information appearing on the page was not considered.)
Generated 10/31/2026, 12:00:51 AM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8759320. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.