Flashcards Studio

In 2023, NebulaBio filed for a patent titled “Targeted siRNA Delivery Using Lipid-Polymer Hybrid Nanoparticles” claiming (i) a lipid-outer shell surrounding a PLGA core; (ii) surface functionalization with an RGD peptide for integrin targeting; (iii) siRNA cargo; (iv) nanoparticle size in the 80–120 nm range; (v) zeta potential from −10 to −20 mV; (vi) a two-step emulsion-solvent evaporation preparation; and (vii) a stated use in targeted cancer therapy. In 2015, NanoBridge Corp published a disclosure describing lipid–polymer hybrid nanoparticles with the same composition, the same targeting ligand (RGD), the same size and zeta potential, and the same preparation steps. (a) Identify the governing doctrine that supports cancellation of NebulaBio’s patent on the ground of lack of novelty. (b) Apply the facts: does NanoBridge’s 2015 disclosure anticipate NebulaBio’s claim and thus render NebulaBio’s patent cancelable for lack of novelty? In your analysis, distinguish novelty from inventive step and indicate which doctrine applies given the facts.