`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`
`
`PAR PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., and ROXANE LABORATORIES,
`INC.
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________________
`
`CASE CBM: Unassigned
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF ROBERT J. VALUCK, Ph.D., R.Ph.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PAR1007
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I.
`
`Overview .......................................................................................................... 1
`
`II. My background and qualifications .................................................................. 5
`
`III.
`
`Person of ordinary skill in the art .................................................................. 10
`
`IV. State of the art ................................................................................................ 11
`
`V.
`
`The ’730 patent and its claims ....................................................................... 15
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 16
`
`Claims 2 - 6 ......................................................................................... 22
`
`Claim 7 ................................................................................................ 23
`
`Claim 8 ................................................................................................ 23
`
`Claim 9 ................................................................................................ 24
`
`Claim 10 .............................................................................................. 24
`
`Claim 11 .............................................................................................. 24
`
`The claims of the ’730 patent recite financially related activities ...... 25
`
`The recitation of a generic computer processor and a generic
`exclusive computer database in the claims of the ’730 patent
`provide no advances over known pharmacy practices ........................ 26
`
`J.
`
`Orange Book listing of the ’730 patent ............................................... 27
`
`VI. A POSA exercising reasonable diligence would have located the
`Advisory Committee Art ............................................................................... 28
`
`VII. Basis of my analysis with respect to anticipation and obviousness .............. 29
`
`A.
`
`The Advisory Committee Art discloses a method that would meet
`all the elements of claims 1-11 ............................................................ 31
`
`1.
`
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 31
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 66
`
`Claim 3 ...................................................................................... 66
`
`Claims 4 and 5 ........................................................................... 68
`
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 69
`
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 70
`
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 71
`
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 72
`
`Claim 10 .................................................................................... 72
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10. Claim 11 .................................................................................... 73
`
`B.
`
`A POSA reading the Advisory Committee Art would have had
`the reason and the know-how to arrive at the methods of claims
`1-11 ...................................................................................................... 73
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`“Computer Processor” and “Exclusive Computer Database” .. 74
`
`“Generating … periodic reports” .............................................. 76
`
`VIII. Secondary considerations of non-obviousness .............................................. 78
`
`A. No commercial success ....................................................................... 78
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`No long-felt but unmet need or failure of others................................. 79
`
`No unexpected superior results ........................................................... 82
`
`IX. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 83
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`
`I, Robert J. Valuck, do hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`Overview
`1.
`
`I am over the age of eighteen (18) and otherwise competent to make
`
`this declaration. This declaration is based on my personal knowledge as an expert
`
`in the fields of drug safety, drug abuse prevention, and prescription drug
`
`distribution. I understand that this declaration is being submitted together with a
`
`petition for a Covered Business Methods Patent Review (“CBM”) of claims 1-11
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 7,668,730 (“the ’730 patent,” PAR1001.)
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of Par
`
`Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Par”) and Roxane Laboratories, Inc. (“Roxane”) for this
`
`CBM. I am being compensated for my time in connection with this declaration at
`
`my standard consulting rate. I have no personal or financial interest in the outcome
`
`of this proceeding.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that the ’730 patent issued on February 23, 2010, and
`
`resulted from U.S. Ser. No. 10/322,348, filed on December 17, 2002. I also
`
`understand that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) records state
`
`that the ’730 patent is currently assigned to Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Jazz”).
`
`4.
`
`In preparing this declaration, I have reviewed the ’730 patent
`
`(PAR1001) and its file history (PAR1002). I have also considered each of the
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`documents listed in the table below, in light of general knowledge in the art as of
`
`December 17, 2002.
`
`Par
`Exhibit #
`
`Description
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`FDA Peripheral & Central Nervous System Drugs Advisory
`Committee, Transcript and Slides (“Advisory Committee
`Transcript and Slides”) (July 13, 2001)
`
`FDA Peripheral & Central Nervous System Drugs Advisory
`Committee, Briefing Information, Division of
`Neuropharmacological Drug Products Preliminary Clinical
`Safety Review of NDA 21-196 (“Preclinical Safety Review”)
`(July 13, 2001)
`
`FDA Peripheral & Central Nervous System Drugs Advisory
`Committee, Briefing Information, Briefing Booklet (“Briefing
`Booklet”) (July 13, 2001)
`
`FDA Peripheral & Central Nervous System Drugs Advisory
`Committee, Briefing Information, Xyrem Video and Transcript
`(“Xyrem Video and Transcript”) (July 13, 2001)
`
`Shulman, S., “The Broader Message of Accutane,” Am. J. of
`Public Health, 79:1565-1568 (1989)
`
`Spurgeon D., “Advent of Mail-Order Pharmacy Causes Concern
`Among Some Pharmacists,” Can. Med. Assoc. J., 152:1485-
`1486 (1995)
`
`Honigfeld, G., “Effects of the Clozapine National Registry
`System on Incidence of Deaths Related to Agranulocytosis,”
`Psychiatric Services, 47:52-56 (1996)
`
`Burleson, K., “Review of computer applications in institutional
`pharmacy—1975-1981,” Am. J. Hosp. Pharm., 39:53-70 (1982)
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Par
`Exhibit #
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`
`Description
`
`Zeldis, J., et al., “S.T.E.P.S.™: A comprehensive Program for
`Controlling and Monitoring Access to Thalidomide,” Clin.
`Therapeutics, 21:319-330 (1999)
`
`“Managing the Risks from Medical Product Use: Creating a
`Risk Management Framework,” Report to the FDA
`Commissioner from the Task Force on Risk Management, U.S.
`Dept. of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
`Administration (1999)
`
`1015
`
`66 Fed. Reg. 24391
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1029
`
`1032
`
`Orange Book Entries for Xyrem®, available at
`http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/docs/obdetail.cf
`m?Appl_No=021196&TABLE1=OB_Rx; and
`http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/docs/patexclnew.
`cfm?Appl_No=021196&Product_No=001&table1=OB_Rx
`
`Rome, E., “It’s a rave new world: Rave culture and illicit drug
`use in the young,” Cleveland Clinic J. of Med., 68:541-550
`(2001)
`
`FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, NDA 21-196,
`Approved Labeling, available at
`http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2002/21-
`196_Xyrem_prntlbl_P1.pdf
`
`Mitchell, A., “A Pregnancy-Prevention Program in Women of
`Childbearing Age Receiving Isotretinoin,” The New England
`Journal of Medicine, 333:101-106 (1995)
`
`Scrima, L., et al., “Efficacy of Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate versus
`Placebo in Treating Narcolepsy-Cataplexy: Double-Blind
`Subjective Measures,” Biol. Psychiatry, 26:331-343 (1989).
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`Generally, the ’730 patent claims are directed to methods of
`
`5.
`
`distributing a prescription drug from an exclusive central pharmacy that
`
`comprises: (1) receiving in a computer processor all prescription requests for any
`
`and all patients from any and all doctors or authorized prescribers only at the
`
`exclusive central pharmacy; (2) entering information from the prescription
`
`requests into an exclusive computer database associated with the exclusive central
`
`pharmacy and processing the prescription requests only by the exclusive central
`
`pharmacy using only the exclusive computer database; (3) checking with a
`
`computer processor the credentials of the prescribing doctor (or authorized
`
`prescriber) to determine his eligibility to prescribe the drug; (4) checking for
`
`potential abuse using the exclusive computer database; (5) mailing, shipping, or
`
`otherwise providing, the prescription drug to the patient only if no abuse is found
`
`by the patient and prescribing doctor (or authorized prescriber); and (6) generating
`
`periodic reports using the computer processor and exclusive computer database to
`
`evaluate potential diversion patterns.
`
`6.
`
`It is my opinion that the methods recited in claims 1-11 can be
`
`performed simply through mental ability and the use of a pen and paper-based
`
`registry. Moreover, it is my opinion that the claimed steps of receiving
`
`prescription requests in a computer processor, requiring entering of the
`
`information from the prescription requests into a computer database, checking
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`with the computer processor the prescribing doctor’s credentials, and checking the
`
`database for potential abuse, are no more than the common place procedures a
`
`pharmacist would employ when using a basic pharmacy computer and database to
`
`fill a prescription.
`
`7.
`
`It is my opinion that the Advisory Committee Art (PAR1003-
`
`PAR1006) either explicitly or implicitly discloses and enables each and every
`
`limitation in claims 1-11 of the ’730 patent, arranged as claimed.
`
`8.
`
`It is also my opinion that a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(“POSA”) would have had a reason and the know-how to arrive at the subject
`
`matter recited in claims 1-11 of the ’730 patent in view of the same Advisory
`
`Committee Art (PAR1003-PAR1006), as discussed in this declaration below, with
`
`a reasonable expectation of success.
`
`9.
`
`In formulating my opinions, I have relied upon my experience in the
`
`relevant art. In formulating my opinions, I have also considered the viewpoint of a
`
`POSA (e.g., a person of ordinary skill in the fields of drug safety, drug abuse
`
`prevention, and prescription drug distribution) as of December 17, 2002.
`
`II. My background and qualifications
`10. My qualifications and credentials are fully set forth in my curriculum
`
`vitae, attached as PAR1008. I am an expert in the fields of drug safety, drug abuse
`
`prevention, and prescription drug distribution. I am knowledgeable about the
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`methods used in the fields of drug safety, drug abuse prevention, and prescription
`
`drug distribution. I also have many years of experience with computerized control
`
`of the distribution of pharmaceutical products. I have been an expert in these fields
`
`since 1994. For the past 20 years, I have accumulated significant training and
`
`experience in these and related fields.
`
`11.
`
`I received a Bachelor’s Degree in Pharmacy from the University of
`
`Colorado School of Pharmacy in Denver, Colorado in 1987. I received a Master’s
`
`Degree in 1992 and a Ph.D. in 1994 in Pharmacy Administration from the
`
`University of Illinois at Chicago in Chicago, Illinois.
`
`12. Since 1987, I have been a registered pharmacist in the state of
`
`Colorado. And since 1989, I have been a registered pharmacist in the state of
`
`Illinois.
`
`13.
`
`In 1987, I was a Pharmacist at Hodel’s Drug in Denver, Colorado.
`
`From 1987 to 1988, I was a Pharmacy Manager at Watson’s Tabor Center Drug in
`
`Denver, Colorado. In these positions, I was a practicing pharmacist (and at the
`
`latter, manager of the pharmacy component of a full service drug store), and
`
`performed all usual and customary duties, including filling prescriptions, entering
`
`patient information into computer database systems, contacting physicians to
`
`verify prescriptions, submitting insurance claims for payment, maintaining
`
`product inventory, ordering products from wholesalers, running dispensing
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`reports, maintaining controlled substance inventory and records, and other duties
`
`as needed to operate the pharmacy.
`
`14. From 1988 to 1989 I was a Decentralized Pharmacist at University
`
`Hospital in Denver, Colorado. In this position, I performed all usual and
`
`customary duties of a hospital clinical pharmacist, including taking medication
`
`histories from patients, interacting and providing drug related advice to physicians
`
`and nurses, filling prescriptions, entering patient information into computer
`
`database systems, running reports for specific patients and prescribers, counseling
`
`patients prior to hospital discharge, and other duties as needed to serve the patient
`
`population.
`
`15. From 1989 to 1993, I was a Registered Pharmacist at Pharmstaff, Inc.
`
`in Chicago, Illinois. In this position, I was a temporary (“relief”) pharmacist, and
`
`worked shifts at various retail and hospital pharmacies in the Chicago area,
`
`performing all usual and customary duties in these settings. This included all
`
`duties listed in items 13 and 14 above—with use of a variety of computer systems
`
`(varying by location, but common in their purpose and uses).
`
`16. From 1990 to 1993, I was a Clinical Pharmacist at Critical Care
`
`America in Elk Grove, Illinois. From 1993 to 1994, I was a Clinical Pharmacist at
`
`Cardiac Alliance in Northbrook, Illinois. In this position, I performed all usual and
`
`customary duties of a home health care (aka “home infusion therapy”) pharmacist
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`serving a national market, including receiving and entering prescriptions into
`
`computer database systems, preparing custom infusion therapy products for
`
`patients, supervising secure shipping of products to patients across the United
`
`States, monitoring patients’ therapeutic progress via remote telemetry systems,
`
`communicating with physicians and nurses regarding patient status, and running
`
`patient and provider specific reports regarding drug therapy.
`
`17. From 1994 to 2001, I was an Assistant Professor in the Department of
`
`Pharmacy Practice at the University of Colorado-Denver. From 1998 to 2003, I
`
`was a Guest Lecturer for the Primary Care Residency Program at the University of
`
`Colorado School of Medicine. From 2001 to 2008, I was an Associate Professor in
`
`the Department of Clinical Pharmacy at the University of Colorado-Denver.
`
`18. Since 1994, I have been a Graduate Faculty Member in the
`
`Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of Colorado-Denver.
`
`Since 1996, I have been a member of the Graduate College at the University of
`
`Colorado-Denver. Since 2006, I have been a Guest Lecturer in the Department of
`
`Preventive Medicine and Biometrics at the University of Colorado School of
`
`Medicine. Since 2008, I have been a Professor in the Department of Clinical
`
`Pharmacy at the University of Colorado-Denver School of Pharmacy. Since 2009,
`
`I have been a Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`Colorado-Denver School of Medicine. Since 2011, I have been a Professor in the
`
`Department of Epidemiology at the Colorado School of Public Health.
`
`19. Since 1995, I have received over 53 grants and contracts to study
`
`prescription drug safety, abuse prevention, and distribution. I have published over
`
`80 papers in peer-reviewed journals on topics including prescription drug safety,
`
`abuse prevention, and distribution. I serve as a reviewer for professional journals
`
`in my field and am a member of the Editorial Boards of Advances in
`
`Pharmacoepidemiology and Current Medical Research and Opinion. Since 2002,
`
`I have been a member of the Risk Management and Medication Compliance
`
`Special Interest Groups of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and
`
`Outcomes Research. I am a member of multiple professional societies including
`
`the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy, the American Association of Colleges
`
`of Pharmacy, the American Pharmacists Association, the Drug Information
`
`Association, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes
`
`Research, and the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology. I have
`
`collaborated with several prominent researchers in the fields of drug safety, drug
`
`abuse prevention, and prescription drug distribution. In addition to my educational
`
`training, professional experiences, and research experiences described above, I
`
`attend conferences on drug safety, drug abuse prevention, and prescription drug
`
`distribution each year, and I have been invited to speak at such conferences.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`20. Accordingly, I am an expert in the fields of drug safety, drug abuse
`
`prevention, and prescription drug distribution. I also have expertise in the practice,
`
`administration, and day-to-day operations of pharmacy, including computerized
`
`control of the distribution of pharmaceutical products. Additionally, I have
`
`experience dispensing drugs subject to risk management programs, such as
`
`Accutane® and Clozaril®. Moreover, I have experience in evaluating the risks
`
`associated with prescription drug use. I am qualified to provide an opinion as to
`
`what a POSA would have understood, known or concluded as of December of
`
`2002. Additionally, I at least meet the criteria of a POSA as outlined below.
`
`III. Person of ordinary skill in the art
`21.
`I understand that a POSA is a hypothetical person who is presumed to
`
`be aware of all pertinent art, thinks along conventional wisdom in the art, and is a
`
`person of ordinary creativity. A POSA may work as part of a multi-disciplinary
`
`team and draw upon not only his or her own skills, but also take advantage of
`
`certain specialized skills of others in the team, to solve a given problem. For
`
`example, a POSA would hold a Bachelors or Doctor of Pharmacy degree and a
`
`license as a registered pharmacist with 3-5 years of relevant work experience, or a
`
`computer science undergraduate degree or equivalent work experience and work
`
`experience relating to business applications, for example, including familiarity
`
`with drug distribution procedures. Alternatively, a POSA may have a blend of
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`computer science and pharmacy drug distribution knowledge and/or experience.
`
`For example, such a POSA may have computer science education qualifications
`
`and experience relating to computerized drug distribution systems, or pharmacy
`
`education qualifications and experience relating to computerized drug distribution
`
`systems. A POSA would have had knowledge of the literature concerning
`
`pharmacy practice and prescription drug distribution, such as the prior art
`
`presented herein, that was available before the earliest effective filing date of the
`
`’730 patent,
`
`including knowledge about methods employed
`
`in
`
`the art.
`
`Accordingly, a POSA would have been well aware of techniques related to the
`
`mitigation of the risk associated with the distribution of potentially hazardous, but
`
`therapeutically beneficial prescription drugs.
`
`IV. State of the art
`22. The mitigation of the risks associated with the distribution of
`
`potentially hazardous prescription drugs was well-known in the art. For example,
`
`in 1982, Hoffman-La Roche (“Roche”) gained approval for Accutane®
`
`(isotretinoin). (PAR1009, 1565:2, ¶1.) However, it soon became apparent that
`
`Accutane® was a potent teratogen that was responsible for several birth defects.
`
`(Id., 1565:1, ¶¶1, 3.) Under pressure to respond, Roche developed a Pregnancy
`
`Prevention Program Kit for distribution to physicians who prescribe Accutane.
`
`(Id., 1567:1, ¶2.) The kit included various forms, such as an informed consent
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`document, that the patient and doctor must fill out indicating that they understand
`
`the risks associated with using Accutane®. (Id., 1567: 1, ¶¶1, 2.) The Accutane®
`
`mitigation plan also included patient counseling on the teratogenic risk of
`
`Accutane®, the need to avoid pregnancy, and the practicing of proper birth control
`
`methods. (Id.) Additionally, women of childbearing potential had to test serum
`
`negative for a pregnancy within two weeks prior to beginning treatment. (Id.)
`
`23. Following in the footsteps of Accutane®, in 1990 Clozaril®
`
`(clozapine) entered the United States market for the treatment of treatment-
`
`resistant schizophrenia. (PAR1011, 52:1, ¶1 and 53:2, ¶1.) However, Clozaril®
`
`use was associated with agranulocytosis, a potentially fatal blood disorder
`
`resulting in white blood cell loss. (Id., 52:1, Abstract, and 53:1, ¶1.) To mitigate
`
`these risks and control
`
`the distribution of Clozaril®,
`
`the manufacturer
`
`implemented a national registry system that limited the distribution of the drug.
`
`(Id., 52:2, ¶2.) The distribution system required registration in an integrated
`
`computerized database—collecting information identifying the patient and the
`
`physician. (Id., 53:2, ¶3.) Additionally, each filling of the prescription required the
`
`physician to measure the patient’s white blood cell count—terminating treatment
`
`if the patient tests positive for agranulocytosis. (Id., 53:1, ¶¶1, 2.) If a patient or
`
`physician was non-compliant with the program, the national registry took
`
`corrective action, such as contacting and re-educating the prescribing physician
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`and/or discontinuing supplying of the prescription to the patient. (Id., 53:1, ¶1 and
`
`3, ¶3.) Overall,
`
`the Clozaril® distribution
`
`system
`
`resulted
`
`in 97%
`
`patient/physician compliance over its first five years of implementation. (Id., 53:3,
`
`¶2.)
`
`24. And while the use of a computer differentiated the Clozaril® system
`
`from the Accutane® system, the use of a computer was not novel to prescription
`
`drug distribution, and especially distribution of hazardous drugs, because by 1990
`
`pharmacies had long been using computers when filling prescriptions. (See, e.g.,
`
`PAR1012, 53:1 and 56:2, ¶1 through 61:1, ¶3.)
`
`25. Based on the experiences of patients and doctors with Accutane® and
`
`Clozapine®, the manufacturers of prescription thalidomide—a known teratogen—
`
`developed a hybrid system, taking the computerized registry system of Clozaril®
`
`and the pregnancy monitoring, pregnancy prevention steps, and informed consent
`
`requirements of Accutane®. (PAR1013, 319:1, ¶1, 320:2, ¶1, 324:1, ¶2, 325:1, ¶1-
`
`2:¶3, and 327:2, ¶¶3, 4.) Additionally, attempts at early re-fills were blocked. (Id.)
`
`This computerized registry system and preventative testing served to monitor and
`
`control the distribution of the drug. (Id., 328:2, ¶¶1, 2 and 329:2, ¶2.)
`
`26. As such, by 1999, at least three systems for the distribution of
`
`effective, yet hazardous prescription drugs were known in the art and implemented
`
`in the industry. Realizing the necessity of developing “[a] better understanding of
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`risks and a more integrated risk management system [to] enable more effective
`
`risk interventions,” the FDA convened a task force to develop a framework for
`
`risk management of medical products. (PAR1014, 1:¶1, and 2: ¶1.) Part of the task
`
`force’s recommendation was to increase “postmarketing risk interventions for
`
`products with special risks, such as restricted distribution of products or requiring
`
`mandatory educational programs for healthcare professionals and patients.” (Id.,
`
`15: ¶3.) For example, the task force pointed to the restricted computer-based
`
`distribution of thalidomide as an example of a successful risk management
`
`program, and noted that restricted distribution can be favorable for certain drugs.
`
`(Id., 83: ¶2.)
`
`27. Moreover, while risk management programs were developing during
`
`the 1980s through 1990s, pharmacies were also making use of computerized
`
`systems to track and control the distribution of controlled substances, i.e., drugs
`
`with potential for abuse. (PAR1012, 56:2, ¶1 through 57:1, ¶1.) Because of the
`
`need
`
`to reduce
`
`time commitment
`
`to dispensing,
`
`improve accuracy and
`
`accountability, and streamline record keeping, the distribution of controlled
`
`substances veered toward automation via the implementation of computerized
`
`systems of distribution. (Id.) Computerized systems were helpful in accelerating
`
`the process of generating reports that notified pharmacists if patients were
`
`receiving excessive supplies of controlled substances. (Id., 56:2, ¶2, 3.)
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`Distribution of controlled substances could be tied to information identifying the
`
`patient, the prescribing doctor, the quantity of the drug dispensed, and hospital
`
`inventory of a drug. (Id., 56:2, ¶3.) In addition, the systems could be queried to
`
`provide data, such as, prescriptions by doctor and patient. (Id.) Ultimately, these
`
`systems allowed for detecting patterns of abuse. (Id., 56:2, ¶1 through 57:1, ¶1.)
`
`28. Consequently, by December of 2002 multiple sources existed in the
`
`art that would have led a POSA to develop centralized distribution systems to
`
`minimize
`
`the risks associated with
`
`the distribution of hazardous, but
`
`therapeutically beneficial prescription drugs.
`
`V. The ’730 patent and its claims
`29.
`I understand that this declaration is being submitted together with a
`
`petition for CBM review of claims 1-11 of the ’730 patent.
`
`30.
`
`I have considered the disclosure of the ’730 patent in light of the
`
`general knowledge in the art as of the earliest possible priority date of the ’730
`
`patent, which I understand to be December 17, 2002.
`
`31. The ’730 patent specification is generally directed towards “[a] drug
`
`distribution system and method utiliz[ing] a central pharmacy and database to
`
`track all prescriptions for a sensitive drug.” (PAR1001, Abstract.) According to
`
`the ’730 patent specification, prescription patterns by physicians and patients are
`
`monitored for abuse using an exclusive central database. Further, physician
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`eligibility to prescribe the drug is verified also using a database, including
`
`determining whether any corrective or approved disciplinary actions have been
`
`brought against the physician. (PAR1001, 1:48-56.) Prior to shipment of a
`
`prescription drug, the central pharmacy confirms whether the patient has been
`
`educated about the prescription, and only ships the prescription drug when no
`
`abuse is found related to the patient and prescribing doctor. (PAR1001, 1:59-63
`
`and 8:62-65.) Reports are then generated to evaluate potential diversion patterns.
`
`(PAR1001, 2:19-21.)
`
`32.
`
`I have been informed that claim terms are given their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation, as understood by a POSA, in view of their specification.
`
`After reading the ’730 patent’s specification, it is my opinion that a POSA reading
`
`the ’730 patent would have understood that all the terms of claims 1-11 should be
`
`given their ordinary meaning except as discussed below. It is also my
`
`understanding that a dependent claim contains all the limitations of the claim from
`
`which it depends.
`
`A. Claim 1
`33. Claim 1 of the ’730 patent generally encompasses a method for
`
`distributing a prescription drug under exclusive control of an exclusive central
`
`pharmacy. (PAR1001, 8:37-9:3.)
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`In particular, claim 1 requires receiving in a computer processor all
`
`34.
`
`prescription requests for any and all patients being prescribed the prescription
`
`drug from any and all doctors allowed to prescribe the drug only at the exclusive
`
`central pharmacy, wherein
`
`the prescription requests contain
`
`information
`
`identifying patients, the prescription drug, and various credentials of the
`
`prescribing doctor (claim 1, clause 1). (PAR1001, 8:40-47.) Next, the method
`
`requires determining if there is potential abuse of the prescription drug by entering
`
`the information from all prescription requests into an exclusive computer database
`
`that is associated with the exclusive central pharmacy and processing all
`
`prescriptions for the prescription drug only by the exclusive central pharmacy
`
`using only the exclusive computer database. (claim 1, clause 2). (Id., 8:48-53.)
`
`Then, the method includes using the computer processor to check the credentials
`
`of all prescribing doctors to determine if a doctor is eligible to prescribe the
`
`prescription drug (claim 1, clause 3). (Id., 8:54-56.) Claim 1 also requires
`
`confirming that the patient read educational materials prior to shipping the
`
`prescription drug (claim 1, clause 4). (Id., 8:57-59.) And claim 1 includes a step of
`
`checking the exclusive computer database for potential abuse of the prescription
`
`drug and mailing the prescription drug if no abuse is found by the patient and the
`
`doctor (claim 1, clauses 5 and 6). (Id., 8:60-64.) Subsequent to that, the method
`
`requires confirming receipt of the prescription drug by the patient (claim 1, clause
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`Covered Business Method Patent Review of USPN 7,668,730
`Declaration of Robert J. Valuck, Ph.D., R.Ph. (Exhibit 1007)
`
`7). (Id., 8:66-67.) Finally, claim 1 requires generating with the computer processor
`
`periodic reports via the exclusive computer database to evaluate potential
`
`diversion patterns (cl