The IP Behind Software-as-a-Drug
When it comes to emerging health technology, securing the necessary IP protections means facing some pretty interesting challenges, including the task…
October 17, 2017 at 10:19 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
When it comes to emerging health technology, securing the necessary IP protections means facing some pretty interesting challenges, including the task of educating patent examiners about an entirely new class of technology.
With healthcare startups and mobile health apps proliferating, a new category of digital healthcare has emerged: digital therapeutics. Also known as “software-as-a-drug,” digital therapeutics use Internet-based technology to help patients change a specific behavior. In fact, studies have shown the technology to be promising for treating a variety of medical and psychological conditions.
Recently, the FDA approved the country's first digital therapeutic: reSET, an app developed by Pear Therapeutics that's being used to help treat substance use disorders. Pear's patent attorney, Scott Barnett of intellectual property law firm Harness Dickey, recently sat down with Inside Counsel to discuss the importance of IP to healthcare startups and this emerging category of digital therapeutics.
Today, digital therapeutics refer to treatments or therapies utilizing digital health technologies to treat medical or psychological conditions. In some instances, according to Barnett, digital therapeutics may be used in place of traditional pharmaceuticals, such as pills, while in other cases digital therapeutics may be used in conjunction with traditional pharmaceutics to improve patient outcomes. Pear's digital therapeutics are unique in that they are clinician prescribed, clinically validated, and in some cases, FDA-cleared. Pear has designed a suite of digital therapeutic offerings, each one succinctly tailored to treat a specific disease or disorder.
“One challenge associated with securing IP protection in a completely new field of technology is educating patent examiners about the technology,” he explained. “Patent examiners are organized according to very specific technology sectors and are accustomed to reviewing very similar types of technology on a day-to-day basis. So, when presenting patent examiners with an outside the box innovation, it becomes critical to supply the context and background information necessary to facilitate an informed decision.”
Healthcare technology, perhaps more so than other areas, has always been high-risk, high-reward. IP protection is essential to ensure adequate return on investment. While IP is useful for carving out exclusive rights in any market, it is even more important in healthcare where the stakes tend to be much higher.
“Analysis of IP rights is always a major step in any pre-investment due diligence. Understandably, investors want assurances that the companies they invest with—including Pear—have a competitive edge in the market,” said Barnett. “Exclusive IP rights frequently provide, or enhance, that competitive edge. Pear's strong IP rights have been a key factor in attracting substantial investment.”
These days, strong IP rights help create a cyclical path to growth, whereby existing IP rights carve out market share, spurring increased revenue. That increased revenue may, in turn, be poured back into the development of new product lines.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
GC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute read'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250