Patent Grant
7954457
The present invention relates to fluid delivery and more particularly to a dispenser for delivering fluid over extended periods of time.
There are various methods used to control pests on large domestic animals such as livestock. Commonly employed methods include sprays and dusts, back rubbers and dust bags, and ear tags or tapes.
Sprays, dusts, and pour-on applications of pesticide involve manually applying pesticide to the animal's back. Although this method can be effective, it requires additional herding and handling and is generally not practical for large ranches or for free-range cattle.
Back rubbers and dust bags are devices that are impregnated or filled with pesticide and suspended in a pasture in proximity to a salt lick, water supply or place the animals frequent. The animals make contact with these devices in the normal course of their routine. The dust bag or back rubber may also be located in a gateway which leads to a salt lick or water supply and which forces the animal to contact the device. Again, this method of insecticide application can be effective, but may not be practical for certain situations such as large ranches or free-range cattle.
Ear tags are widely used and are generally made of a molded polymer matrix impregnated (i.e., saturated or immersed) with a substance such as a pesticide or parasiticide. These ear tags or tapes are attached to animals by piercing the ear with a sharp post and corresponding locking receptacle or with adhesive. The pesticide slowly leaches from the carrier material and is deposited onto the animal. The animal then spreads the material by moving its head from side to side and by rubbing alongside other animals.
The delivery of substance from these known ear tags is problematic. Among other delivery problems, the tags release the substance after packaging such that it crystallizes on the surface of the tag itself, thereby exposing the user to a high concentration of the pesticide. Another significant problem is that the output of the tags is not constant. Initially, they supply excessive doses of the substance, but over time, their output falls below an effective or lethal level, where it remains. The tags then supply doses that are less than lethal for weeks or perhaps months before their nominal expiration date. Unfortunately, exposing parasites to a sub-lethal dose causes future generations of these pests to develop a resistance or immunity to the substance. In turn, for a given area in which the tags are used, the type of tags used must be frequently changed so that the pests are exposed to a new substance to which they have not developed a resistance. This can create excess inventory of tags that are no longer effective, and can undesirably result in tags that have only been worn by the animals a short time before having to be replaced. The labor and costs associated with “re-tagging” animals mid-season can be quite large.
Moreover, the types of substances which can be used to saturate known ear tags is generally limited due to solubility and/or compatibility between the saturating substance and the polymer matrix. For example, compounds like ivermectin and spinosad have relatively high molecular weights and poor solubility in polymers such as polyethylene. These compounds are essentially incompatible with conventional ear tags.
Another problem with known ear tags is the inherent limit in the amount of liquid pesticide that can be saturated into a given size polymer matrix. It is not practical to produce a device large enough to contain sufficient insecticide to kill pests for an entire season. The size of the device would be such that it interferes with the animal's normal routine and would likely cause discomfort or injury to the animal, such as eye irritation, drooping ears, tears in the ear at the location of attachment, etc.
It would be desirable to have an application method and dispenser that is capable of dosing a repeatable, prolonged, and lethal application of pesticide to an animal with no gradual decline, but rather, a sudden and complete cessation of exposure, and does not require further herding, handling or contact with the animal.
The present invention provides a dispenser that delivers a small but consistent and sustained dose of fluid over an extended period of time.
In one form thereof, the present invention provides a dispenser. The dispenser has a shell having an opening. A reservoir is disposed in the shell and is saturated with a liquid substance. A wick is in fluid communication with the reservoir. The wick extends through the opening and has a greater capillary attraction than the reservoir, whereby during use of the dispenser the wick draws pesticide from the reservoir and deposits the liquid substance on an animal upon contact.
In preferred forms of the dispenser, various methods may be used to provide the wick with a greater capillary attraction or wicking ability than the reservoir. For example, the wick may be made of a material having a greater density than the material from which the reservoir is formed. Also, depending upon the hydrophilicity of the substance being dispensed, a wick that is more hydrophilic than the reservoir may result in a greater capillary attraction for the wick. A wick having a smaller pore size than the reservoir may also result in the wick having a greater capillary attraction than the reservoir. In certain embodiments, the wick and the reservoir are comprised of the same material and the shell comprises a sleeve that exerts a compressive force on the wick to reduce its pore size and thus increase its capillary attraction.
In certain exemplary embodiments, the wick either protrudes from the opening or is substantially flush with the opening. More preferably, the shell comprises a sleeve which defines the opening, and the wick is disposed in the sleeve. A skirt extends from the shell, the skirt at least partially surrounding the sleeve.
In another form thereof, the present invention provides a novel method of dispensing a substance onto an animal. In this method, a pesticide dispenser is provided. The dispenser has a shell and a reservoir disposed in the shell. The reservoir contains or is saturated with a liquid substance such as a pesticide, and a wick is in fluid communication with the reservoir. The wick extends into the opening. In the inventive method, the dispenser is attached to the animal such that the wick is free to contact the animal as the animal moves. The animal is permitted to go about its normal activities, during which the liquid substance is gradually dispensed from the dispenser and onto the animal by capillary action.
In a preferred form thereof, the wick has a greater capillary attraction than the reservoir and the wick continues to draw the substance from the reservoir and dispense it until the dispenser is essentially empty. More preferably, the liquid substance is a pesticide and the dispenser may dispense the pesticide for at least 120, and more preferably, at least 180 days when attached to an animal that goes about normal activities such as grazing.
One advantage of the present invention is that the dose of substance being dispensed remains substantially constant as the supply is being consumed. That is, the dose being dispensed does not drop off appreciably until the dispenser is almost empty. The amount of the dose dispensed with dispensers embodying the present invention is substantially independent of the volume of liquid contained in the dispenser. This addresses the problems with known polymer tags that initially produce an extremely high dose which soon drops off to a sub-lethal dose that quickly allows pests to develop a resistance or immunity to the substance being dispensed. Since dispensers in accordance with the present invention can produce a consistently lethal dose until substantially depleted, the chance of pests developing a tolerance to the substance is reduced, or at least takes much longer than with polymer saturated tags.
Another advantage of the present invention is that a small, lightweight dispenser may be filled with sufficient pesticide to last an entire season before being depleted. The costs and labor associated with mid season “re-tagging” are thus avoided with the present invention.
Yet another advantage of the present invention is that the dispensers can be handled and attached without contacting the substance contained therein. The only source of the pesticide (or whatever substance the dispenser may happen to contain) is the wick. However, in exemplary embodiments, the wick is either substantially flush with the opening or protrudes slightly from the opening. Touching the wick when, e.g., attaching the device to an animal's ear can easily be avoided.
Still another advantage of the present invention is that the shape of dispensers formed in accordance with preferred embodiments is ergonomic. That is, the animals generally appear able to tolerate wearing the dispensers for long periods of time without noticeable irritation and without the dispensers getting ensnared by, e.g., fences, other animals, or otherwise interfering with the animals' normal routine.
The above-mentioned and other advantages of the present invention, and the manner of obtaining them, will become more apparent and the invention itself will be better understood by reference to the following description of the embodiments of the invention taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
Corresponding reference characters indicate corresponding parts throughout the several views.
The embodiments of the present invention described below are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed in the following detailed description. Rather, the embodiments are chosen and described so that others skilled in the art may appreciate and understand the principles and practices of the present invention.
Referring now to
Dispenser 20 includes a ring 32 that secures cap 34 to shell 22, as can be appreciated with reference to
A wick 50 is in fluid communication with reservoir 28 and extends through opening 26. Fluid communication is established by having the wick 50 pressed against or abutting reservoir 28, in those embodiments in which the reservoir and wick are formed separately. In the illustrated embodiment, wick 50 has a greater “capillary attraction” or “wicking ability” than does reservoir 28, which means that wick 50 will tend to draw fluid from reservoir 28 by means of capillary action, as explained in greater detail below. A skirt 52 extends downwardly from shell 22 and protects wick 50, as explained below.
With reference to
With reference to
With reference to
When the wick touches the animal's fur or skin, the pesticide is dispensed by capillary action. While shown attached to the animal's ear, the dispenser 20 could be attached to the tail, hung around the neck or otherwise attached to the animal. The dispenser should be attached, however, such that the animal's normal movement causes the pesticide to be transferred to the animal's fur or skin by mechanical contact with the wick, much like a pen deposits ink on a page upon contact. Once the liquid pesticide is deposited onto the animal, it is further spread through the animal's normal movement and through contact with other animals. As the animal moves its head from side to side and rubs along other animals through social contact, it has been found that the liquid pesticide is spread along the entire length of the animal.
As the animal's movement continues and pesticide is dispensed from wick 50, wick 50 in turn continues to draw pesticide from reservoir 28 because, as noted above, the wick has a greater capillary attraction than the reservoir. Advantageously, the wick continues to draw pesticide from the reservoir and dispenses the pesticide until the dispenser is essentially emptied of pesticide and provides a substantially constant level of output until the dispenser is almost empty. In other words, the rate of dispensing is substantially independent of the amount of fluid contained in the reservoir until the reservoir is close to being empty. Thus, the problems with saturated polymer tags in which the pesticide quickly drops off to a sub-lethal dose are avoided. In conditions of normal use, the dispenser can be used for at least 30 days, preferably 60 days, more preferably at least 120 days, and most preferably at least 180 days, before the pesticide is depleted. This is longer than known polymer tags that are saturated with pesticides. The amount of substance dispensed per contact can be adjusted by adjusting the extent to which the wick protrudes from the opening. In certain exemplary embodiments, the end of the wick 50′ shown in
As noted above, wick 50 must have a greater capillary attraction than the reservoir. It should be understood that for purposes of this application, “capillary attraction” means the tendency of a material to draw liquid therein. The higher the “capillary attraction,” the greater this tendency. Those of skill in the art also refer to this tendency as “wicking,” “wicking ability,” “capillary action,” “capillary pull,” “wicking strength” and the like. Felt has excellent, predictable, and consistent wicking capabilities, and various types of felt can be used for both the wick and reservoir. Fibrous bundles are also excellent choices for wick 50 and reservoir 28. For example, one commercial material suitable for wick 50 is bonded polyolefin fiber bundle with a density of 0.27 g/cc (supplied by Filtrona Fibertec, 1625 Ashton Park Drive, Colonial Heights, Va., 23834) Filtrona sample no. 05-052. One commercial material suitable for reservoir 28 is bonded polyolefin fiber bundle with a density of 0.122 g/cc (supplied by Filtrona Fibertec, 1625 Ashton Park Drive, Colonial Heights, Va., 23834) Filtrona sample no. 03-368A. One of skill in the art would readily recognize, however, that many other materials can be used for the wick and the reservoir, such as cotton, polyester, fibers (including glass fibers), nylon, polypropylene and many others. The materials should be chosen such that the wick has a greater capillary action or wicking strength than the reservoir, and such that the fur of the animal draws fluid from the wick by capillary action upon contact.
The selection of materials for the wick and reservoir may depend upon the substance being dispensed, e.g., its viscosity, volatility, hydrophilicity, surface tension and other fluid properties. Liquids dispensed with dispenser 20 are typically non-volatile so that they do not evaporate from wick 50, but instead are only transferred from wick 50 upon contact. Generally speaking, if felt or a fibrous bundle is used for reservoir 28 and wick 50, the capillary action or wicking ability increases with increasing density of the substance. However, the wicking properties of wick 50 and reservoir 28 can vary with the type of substance being dispensed. The exemplary wick and reservoir material identified in the previous paragraph were tested and performed satisfactorily when the substance being dispensed was spinosad formulation M08-AH00277-7-1 (lot X-51908) Elanco Animal Health, 2001 West Main Street, Greenfield, Ind. 46140, as detailed in the examples below.
With reference to
Furthermore, it should be appreciated that because the disclosed embodiments work by capillary action, the wick need not be placed at the bottom of the dispenser and the dispenser need not be attached to the animal such that the wick is pointing downward. With reference to
Since the dispenser disclosed herein delivers fluid by wicking, as opposed to gravity or pressure differentials, a wide variety of pesticides can be used. These include but are not limited to various avermectins, benzimidazoles, milbemycins, carbamates, organophosphates, phenylpyrazoles, amidines, insect growth regulators, juvenile hormones, nicotinoids, pyrroles, pyrethrins, pyrethroids and naturalytes (i.e. the spinosyn family). Representative compounds may include abamectin, doramectin, eprinomectin, selamectin, alphamethrin, amitraz, coumaphos, ivermectin, deltamethrin, cyhalothrin, diazinon, cyromazine, cypermethrin, milbemycin, cyfluthrin, cyloprothrin, famphur, fenthion, fenvalerate, flucythrinate, flumethrin, hexaflumuron, lindane, lufenuron, malathion, methoprene, metriphonate, moxidectin, permethrin, pyrethrin, pyrethrum, phosmet, pirimiphos, chlorvinphos, rotenone, propetamphos, tetrachlorvinphos, zetacypermethrin, coumaphos and spinosad, among others.
Specific examples embodying the technology described above are set forth below.
Objective: In this example two prototype devices similar in structure to device 20 described above were tested to determine the fluid payout difference between a dispenser that had repeated mechanical contact compared to an identical dispenser left in a static position.
Prototype Description: The dispensers used in this example were fabricated from a plastic shell and insert materials used in a marker manufactured by Sanford Corp. under the Accent® brand. The reservoir was made of Formax 609, Acetal Copolymer from Chem Polymer Corporation and a wick formed from bonded polyolefin fiber bundle with a density of 0.27 g/cc (supplied by Filtrona Fibertec, 1625 Ashton Park Drive, Colonial Heights, Va., 23834) Filtrona sample no. 05-052. The devices were filled with approximately 8 cc of spinosad formulation M08-AH00277-7-1 (lot X-51908) and weight was recorded.
An attachment means similar to attachment means 36 was grafted to the top of the dispenser shell that was used for the repeated mechanical contact, and this dispenser was attached to a mechanical cow ear having faux fur. The other dispenser (which was maintained stationary) had no attachment means, only a plug to seal it at the top, which explains the discrepancy in weights between the two dispensers.
Test Apparatus:
One device was attached to the mechanical cow ear and allowed to run at an approximate rate of one cycle per 7 seconds. Each cycle consists of the ear flicking backward and making momentary contact with the faux fur. The other device was placed in a vertical and stationary position and left undisturbed with the exception of weight recording. The devices were weighed at regular intervals and weights were recorded.
Observations:
After one hour of cycling, there was visible evidence of the spinosad formulation on the faux fur. The odor of the formulation could also be detected on the faux fur. The devices were checked again at 24 hours. Results are recorded in Table 1, below.
After the 24 hour check the test was re-started. The weight of the devices were checked hourly for five hours. The fur was changed to a clean patch at each hour in an attempt to obtain a more consistent payout. The results presented in Table 1 show that the device that repeatedly contacted the faux fur dispensed at an hourly rate of approximately 55 times greater than the dispenser that was held stationary.
The objective of this test was to determine if the dispenser payout rate can be altered by changing the amount of surface area of the wick exposed at the tip of the device, i.e., whether the rate can be altered by increasing the amount by which the wick protrudes from the opening.
Prototype Description: A dispenser as described above with respect to Example 1 was used. The dispenser was filled with approximately 8 cc of spinosad formulation M08-AH00277-7-1 (lot X-51908) and weight was recorded.
As in Example 1, the dispenser used for the repeated mechanical contact had an attachment means, whereas the stationary device did not.
Test Apparatus:
The dispenser initially had its wick protruding about ¼″ from the opening of the dispenser. It was attached to the mechanical cow ear and allowed to run at an approximate rate of one cycle per 7 seconds. Each cycle consists of the ear flicking backward and making momentary contact with the faux fur. The device was allowed to cycle for two hours. Weight was recorded at each hour. At the end of the two hours, the device was removed from the mechanical ear and approximately ½ of the protruding portion of its wick was removed. Weight was recorded and the above sequence was repeated. At the end of the second two hour cycle, the device was once again removed from the mechanical ear and the wick was cut flush with the end of the device. Weight was recorded and the above sequence was repeated.
Observations:
Shortening the wick and accordingly decreasing the surface area available for contact produces a measurable effect on payout. The payout decreased by a little more than 50% when the amount of the wick protruding was reduced by about half. The dispenser then lost very little or no weight when the wick was cut off flush with the opening. It was also difficult to detect any of the liquid spinosad formulation on the faux fur, whereas the liquid spinosad could be easily seen on the samples taken with an exposed wick. Table 2, below, illustrates these results.
Determine whether an additional prototype will payout fluid at a rate similar to the dispenser of Example 1 under similar conditions.
Prototype Description:
A prototype similar to that described in Example 1 was used. The device was filled with approximately 8 cc of spinosad formulation M08-AH00277-7-1 (lot X-51908) and weight was recorded.
Test Apparatus:
The device was attached to the mechanical cow ear and allowed to run at an approximate rate of one cycle per 7 seconds. Each cycle consists of the ear flicking backward and making momentary contact with the faux fur. The device was weighed hourly and weights were recorded. The mechanical ear was moved to a clean patch of faux fur at each hour.
Observations:
After one hour of cycling, there was visible evidence of the spinosad formulation on the faux fur. The odor of the formulation could also be detected on the faux fur. Results are recorded in Table 3, below.
Determine if elevated temperature causes spinosad formulation to leak from the dispenser in droplet form. (Weight loss due to evaporation was not considered in this test.)
Prototype Description:
The prototype was similar to that described in Example 1. The dispenser was filled with approximately 8 cc of spinosad formulation M08-AH00277-7-1 (lot X-51908) and weight was recorded.
Test Apparatus:
The dispenser was placed in a vertical orientation inside the oven and the oven temperature was set to 50° C. A polished stainless steel slide was placed below the device to help identify any potential dripping. The device was observed for 24 hours.
Observations:
The device was visually checked several times over the course of 24 hours. No dripping was observed. In addition, drops did not form on the end of the wick nor at the bottom of the reservoir. The dispenser appeared to retain all the liquid. At the end of the test, the dispenser was removed from the oven and tested on a piece of paper to determine if the wick had dried out. Initially, the wick felt a bit dry as it was applied to the paper. However, after minimal contact with the paper, the dispenser began to pay out liquid to the paper.
While a preferred embodiment incorporating the principles of the present invention has been disclosed hereinabove, the present invention is not limited to the disclosed embodiments. Instead, this application is intended to cover any variations, uses, or adaptations of the invention using its general principles. Further, this application is intended to cover such departures from the present disclosure as come within known or customary practice in the art to which this invention pertains and which fall within the limits of the appended claims.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3465724 | Broadbent | Sep 1969 | A |
| 3541995 | Fathauer | Nov 1970 | A |
| 3756200 | Ohlhausen | Sep 1973 | A |
| 3781837 | Anderson et al. | Dec 1973 | A |
| 3840009 | Michaels et al. | Oct 1974 | A |
| 3893111 | Cotter | Jul 1975 | A |
| 3902084 | May | Aug 1975 | A |
| 3929277 | Byrne et al. | Dec 1975 | A |
| 3935839 | Goodwin | Feb 1976 | A |
| 3941283 | Garbe | Mar 1976 | A |
| 3949708 | Meeks | Apr 1976 | A |
| 4023532 | Goodwin | May 1977 | A |
| 4184453 | Ritchey | Jan 1980 | A |
| 4225578 | von Bittera et al. | Sep 1980 | A |
| 4286005 | Berger | Aug 1981 | A |
| 4354889 | Berger | Oct 1982 | A |
| 4359015 | Ritchey | Nov 1982 | A |
| 4366777 | Akhavein et al. | Jan 1983 | A |
| 4381782 | Mazurak et al. | May 1983 | A |
| 4399821 | Bowers | Aug 1983 | A |
| 4425117 | Hugemann et al. | Jan 1984 | A |
| 4425874 | Child | Jan 1984 | A |
| 4428327 | Steckel | Jan 1984 | A |
| 4495898 | Akhavein et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
| 4506630 | Hair | Mar 1985 | A |
| RE31940 | Ritchey | Jul 1985 | E |
| 4532530 | Hawkins | Jul 1985 | A |
| 4532892 | Kuzara | Aug 1985 | A |
| 4543247 | von Bittera et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
| 4544547 | Von Bittera et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
| 4562794 | Speckman | Jan 1986 | A |
| 4579085 | McGuire | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4596575 | Rosenberg et al. | Jun 1986 | A |
| 4606478 | Hack et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
| 4612877 | Hayes | Sep 1986 | A |
| 4617876 | Hayes | Oct 1986 | A |
| 4674445 | Cannelongo | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4694781 | Howe et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4697549 | Hair | Oct 1987 | A |
| 4718374 | Hayes | Jan 1988 | A |
| 4721064 | Denk et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
| 4748939 | Cocke et al. | Jun 1988 | A |
| 4750284 | Parry et al. | Jun 1988 | A |
| 4854328 | Pollack | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4865044 | Wallace et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
| 4870926 | Smith | Oct 1989 | A |
| 4890580 | Owen et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
| 4930451 | Miller et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4944659 | Labbe et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
| 5044114 | Haberer | Sep 1991 | A |
| 5046453 | Vinci | Sep 1991 | A |
| 5074252 | Morgan, Jr. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5167625 | Jacobsen et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5190220 | Bolton | Mar 1993 | A |
| 5318557 | Gross | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5429606 | Robinson et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5582593 | Hultman | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5618269 | Jacobsen et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5620696 | Krzewki et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5750514 | Meyer | May 1998 | A |
| 5823989 | Ostrow | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5894841 | Voges | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5932204 | Joshi | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5980496 | Jacobsen et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6056734 | Jacobsen et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6109539 | Joshi et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6113539 | Ridenour | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6283065 | Shorrock et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6293474 | Helf et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6296196 | Denen et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6339897 | Hayes et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6341732 | Martin et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6367925 | Chen et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6375649 | Jellie | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6378780 | Martens, III et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6382522 | Tomkins et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
| 6386462 | Martens, III | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6419163 | Joshi et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6436069 | Jellie | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6439474 | Denen | Aug 2002 | B2 |
| 6446880 | Schram et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6450419 | Martens, III et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6482863 | Munagavalasa et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6543389 | Hedde | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6588376 | Groh | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6664897 | Pape et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6668760 | Groh et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6669682 | Gibson et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6758000 | Sandt et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6786427 | Schram et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6789741 | Varanasi et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6793149 | Schram et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6800070 | Mazidji et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6835386 | Gutierrez | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6843430 | Boticki et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6857580 | Walter et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6879693 | Miller et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6923383 | Joshi et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6962579 | Jellie | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 7387216 | Smith | Jun 2008 | B1 |
| 20010020317 | Heisig et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010050317 | Denen | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020087120 | Rogers et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020088154 | Sandt et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020158156 | Joshi et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020192255 | Schiavo et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030062001 | Andersson | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030212386 | Trompen et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040161282 | Bolton | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040199116 | Trompen et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20050025979 | Sandt et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050145187 | Gray | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20060037557 | Gordon | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20080245314 | Brodowski et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0 140 558 | May 1985 | EP |
| 5065879 | Mar 1993 | JP |
| WO 8805314 | Jul 1988 | WO |
| WO 9801023 | Jan 1998 | WO |
| WO 0216048 | Feb 2002 | WO |
| WO 03028797 | Apr 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004066720 | Aug 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004089238 | Oct 2004 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20070057085 A1 | Mar 2007 | US |
