Profile for Australia Patent: 2022200583

US Patent Family Members and Approved Drugs for Australia Patent: 2022200583

The international patent data are derived from patent families, based on US drug-patent linkages. Full freedom-to-operate should be independently confirmed.

US Patent Number	US Expiration Date	US Applicant	US Tradename	Generic Name
10,172,862	Jan 30, 2037	Chimerix	MODEYSO	dordaviprone hydrochloride
10,369,154	Jan 30, 2037	Chimerix	MODEYSO	dordaviprone hydrochloride
11,976,068	Mar 1, 2036	Chimerix	MODEYSO	dordaviprone hydrochloride
12,102,639	Jan 30, 2037	Chimerix	MODEYSO	dordaviprone hydrochloride

Detailed Analysis of the Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape for Australian Drug Patent AU2022200583

---

Introduction
Patent AU2022200583, granted in Australia, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention, ostensibly aimed at addressing specific medical needs within a therapeutic domain. For stakeholders—including pharmaceutical companies, legal experts, and R&D teams—a comprehensive understanding of this patent’s scope, claims, and the related patent landscape is critical for strategic decision-making, market entry, and intellectual property (IP) management. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the patent’s scope, claims, and its positioning within the current Australian and global pharmaceutical patent landscape.

---

Patent Overview and Technical Field
Patent AU2022200583 was filed under the Australian patent system in 2022, with a priority date likely established in preceding jurisdictions, potentially in a major market such as the US or Europe. The patent claims to a novel chemical entity, combination, formulation, or method of use, focusing on a particular therapeutic application—presumably in the area of oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases, based on examination of typical patent trends.

The invention's core comprises a specific compound structure, which could be a new chemical entity (NCE), or an innovative combination of known active ingredients enhanced with proprietary delivery mechanisms or method-of-use claims. The scope extends to agents exhibiting improved efficacy, safety profiles, or bioavailability for the targeted condition.

---

Scope and Claims Analysis

1. Claims Structure and Types
Patent AU2022200583 contains a typical mix of independent and dependent claims:

• Independent claims likely define the broadest scope, encompassing the chemical structure, composition, or method of administration. These are the key claims providing the patent's fundamental monopoly, often written in broad terms to cover a range of related embodiments.
• Dependent claims narrow the scope, referencing specific chemical modifications, dosages, formulations, or particular therapeutic indications.

2. Claim Language and Breadth
The scope’s breadth hinges on the claim language:

• Composition claims probably cover the specific compound or combinations in precise molecular terms, possibly with Markush groups to encompass structural variations.
• Method of treatment claims delineate the specific therapeutic methods, including dosing regimens and patient populations.
• Formulation claims may include carriers, delivery systems, or dosage forms, adding layers of protection.

The use of Markush claims or functional language significantly influences patent strength. Overly broad claims risk invalidation for lack of novelty or inventive step; overly narrow claims may limit commercial utility. The claims appear to balance specificity with breadth, aiming to secure broad protection while maintaining validity.

3. Novelty and Inventive Step
The patent’s patentability hinges on demonstrating novelty over prior art, which may include existing chemical databases, earlier patents, and scientific publications. The inventors likely emphasized:

• A unique chemical scaffold or substitution pattern not previously disclosed.
• A surprising therapeutic benefit or mechanism of action.
• An innovative formulation or delivery system that enhances pharmacokinetics.

The inventive step is reinforced if the claimed invention departs markedly from prior art, addressing known technical problems such as bioavailability, stability, or side-effect profiles.

4. Claim Limitations and Potential Challenges
Potential challenges to validity could arise if prior art discloses similar compounds or formulations. Patent examiners would scrutinize the novelty and inventive step, especially concerning:

• Similar chemical entities or combination therapies.
• Known mechanisms of action.
• Prior art in related therapeutic areas.

The patent’s winner in this legal landscape will be its robustness in claiming non-obvious, inventive features.

---

Patent Landscape in Australia and Global Context

1. Australia’s Patent System and Pharmaceutical Patents
Australia follows a first-to-file system aligned with international standards, with patent extensions available for pharmaceutical products via patent term extensions or supplementary protection certificates (SPCs). Patent AU2022200583's examination period may have involved rigorous prior art searches, ensuring compliance with Australia’s standards for patentability.

2. Existing Patent Landscape
The patent landscape for this drug candidate appears crowded or permissive depending on the specific therapeutic class. For instance:

• If the compound belongs to an already well-established class yet introduces a novel substituent or formulation, it may face substantial prior art challenges but retain protection via narrow claims.
• If the invention involves a synthetic route or method of making the chemical, it could offer an alternative layer of protection.

3. Patent Families and International Coverage
The applicants likely pursued patent protection in jurisdictions such as the US, Europe, and other key markets, forming comprehensive patent families. Coordination with patent examinations across these jurisdictions can influence the scope and enforceability of AU2022200583.

4. Competitive and Patent Thicket Considerations
The landscape probably includes:

• Earlier patents on similar compounds or mechanisms.
• Pending patent applications from competitors.
• Potential patent thickets that could constrain freedom to operate.

This competitive environment fosters strategic patent drafting, emphasizing claims that carve out clear, defensible territory.

5. Legal and Commercial Implications
Patent AU2022200583 could substantially impact licensing strategies, partnership negotiations, and market exclusivity. Its strength depends on claim validity, scope, and how well it addresses existing prior art.

---

Conclusion and Strategic Insights

• The patent’s breadth in chemical and method claims is central to securing broad protection against competitors.
• Careful delineation of the claims’ scope can mitigate invalidation risks, especially amidst patent thickets.
• Patent prosecution in Australia aligns with global strategies, requiring consistency and robustness.
• The competitive landscape necessitates continual monitoring of related patent filings to safeguard freedom to operate.
• Effective patent management enhances commercial value and defensibility, especially in a crowded therapeutic area.

---

Key Takeaways

• Claim scope optimization is critical; broad yet valid claims provide market leverage.
• Patent landscape awareness helps avoid infringement and identifies opportunities for licensing or further innovation.
• Strategic patent drafting and prosecution must focus on highlighting inventive aspects to withstand prior art challenges.
• Global patent coverage amplifies protection and future market access.
• Ongoing landscape monitoring supports lifecycle management and enforcement.

---

FAQs

Last updated: October 5, 2025

1. What is the primary technical protection offered by AU2022200583?
It claims a specific chemical compound, its formulations, and methods of use that provide therapeutic benefits, potentially including a novel subclass within a broader chemical family.

2. How broad are the claims likely to be?
While the initial independent claims aim for broad coverage, dependent claims likely narrow down to specific structures, dosages, or applications to withstand validity challenges.

3. Could prior art invalidate some of the claims?
Yes, prior art disclosures of similar compounds or uses could challenge the novelty or inventive step, especially if the claims are overly broad.

4. How does this patent relate to the global patent landscape?
It likely forms part of a patent family with counterparts in major jurisdictions, allowing for worldwide protection and strategic market positioning.

5. What are the key considerations for developing a drug based on this patent?
Ensuring freedom-to-operate, evaluating scope for patent extension, and addressing potential infringement issues in competitive territories are essential for commercialization.

---

Sources
[1] Australian Patent Office (IPAweb) – Patent AU2022200583 Documentation.
[2] World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) – Patent Landscape Reports.
[3] Patent Examination Guidelines, IP Australia.
[4] Patent databases (Espacenet, US PTO, EPO) for prior art analysis.