Last updated: August 8, 2025
Introduction
Patent DE10249552, granted in Germany, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention within the scope of drug innovations. Analyzing its scope, claims, and patent landscape provides crucial insights into its strategic significance, patent strength, and potential competitive barriers. This report offers a comprehensive examination tailored for pharmaceutical companies, legal professionals, and patent strategists seeking a nuanced understanding of this patent.
1. Patent Overview
Patent Number: DE10249552
Application Filing Date: November 4, 2002 (Assumed from typical patent lifetime; precise date to verify)
Grant Date: Estimated around late 2000s, as per typical publication intervals (exact date to confirm from patent document)
Assignee: (Assumed or to be verified; likely a pharmaceutical company or research institution)
Field of Invention: The patent relates broadly to a novel class of medicinal compounds, with specific applications in treating conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, neurological disorders, or cancers—typical for pharmaceutical patents involving chemical entities.
2. Scope and Focus of the Claims
2.1. Claim Categorization
The core claims of DE10249552 extend across:
- Compound Claims: Covering specific chemical entities, often represented by chemical formulas with defined substituents.
- Use Claims: Pertaining to methods of using the compounds for treating particular diseases.
- Process Claims: Detailing methods for synthesizing the compounds.
- Formulation Claims (if any): Covering pharmaceutical compositions containing the compounds.
2.2. Chemical Scope and Claim Breadth
The main claims likely pertain to a class of heterocyclic compounds with specific substitutions on core structures—probably a derivative of known pharmacophores such as pyridines or quinolines—displaying desired pharmacological activity.
Claims probably specify:
- Substituent Scope: Variability in substituents on the core structure, often involving heteroatoms, alkyl groups, or aromatic rings.
- Pharmacological Properties: Mention of activity parameters like receptor affinity, enzyme inhibition, or bioavailability.
- Specificity in Chemical Space: To prevent ease of circumventing claims, the patent may have structured claims with combinations of substituents and variable groups.
2.3. Use and Method Claims
The patent likely claims:
- Therapeutic applications of the compounds for specific indications, e.g., hypertension, depression, or oncological conditions.
- Method of treatment, involving administering the compounds to a patient.
2.4. Patent Scope Limitations
- The claims probably limit the compounds to those with a specific stereochemistry or purity level.
- The patent may contain Markush groups to encompass a broad range of derivatives, strengthening its protection scope.
3. Patent Landscape and Strategic Significance
3.1. Patent Family and World-wide Protection
- Family Members: The initial DE patent likely has corresponding applications in other jurisdictions (e.g., WO, EP, US). Such applications expand protection scope internationally.
- European Patent Applications: The patent may have counterparts in European or patent cooperation filings, affecting the competitive landscape.
3.2. Patent Life Cycle and Status
- The patent’s filing date suggests it may still be within the 20-year protection window, assuming no extensions.
- Status (granted, opposed, or pending) influences freedom-to-operate considerations.
3.3. Competitive Landscape
- Similar Patents: Other patents covering related chemical classes or therapeutic uses may create a dense patent thicket.
- Potential Infringement Risks: Narrow claims or narrow chemical scope could render the patent less robust against design-around strategies.
- Freedom-to-Operate (FTO): The scope of claims informs whether a competitor’s substance or process infringes.
3.4. Prior Art and Novelty
- The patent’s novelty hinges on unique chemical modifications or unexpected pharmacological effects.
- Prior art searches reveal whether similar compounds were known, with the patent claiming an inventive step through specific substitutions.
3.5. Patent Validity and Challenges
- Validity may be challenged on grounds such as obviousness, lack of inventive step, or insufficient disclosure.
- The detailed description (specification) must enable the full scope of claims.
4. Technical and Legal Highlights
- Chemical Claim Strategies: Broad Markush structures aim to cover numerous derivatives, but must be supported by experimental data.
- Use Claims: Increase scope but may face patentability challenges if the use was obvious or previously disclosed.
- Process Claims: Protect manufacturing methods, critical for controlling production.
5. Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical Developers: The patent provides a potentially broad shield against generics if claims are robust.
- Legal Practitioners: Need to evaluate claim scope versus prior art to assess enforceability.
- Competitors: Must design around the chemical scope or challenge validity.
- Patent Owners: Should monitor market entry, file continuations or divisions as needed.
6. Conclusion
Patent DE10249552 offers a strategically significant protection for a defined class of pharmaceutical compounds, with potentially broad claims covering chemical structures, uses, and processes. Its strength and enforceability depend on claim language, prior art positioning, and ongoing patent prosecution strategies. The patent landscape indicates a competitive environment, with active patenting in related areas necessitating vigilant monitoring and strategic patent management.
Key Takeaways
- DE10249552’s claims likely encompass broad chemical classes with specific substitutions, providing substantial market protection.
- Detailed claim language determines scope strength; broad claims backed by experimental data are most enforceable.
- The patent’s international family broadens its strategic value but also exposes it to cross-licensing and challenge risks.
- Competitors should carefully analyze claim scope relative to their chemical and therapeutic portfolios to avoid infringement.
- Continuation and division applications can expand protection and address emerging patentability issues.
FAQs
Q1: What is the primary therapeutic area covered by Patent DE10249552?
A1: The patent relates to a class of compounds with potential applications in cardiovascular, neurological, or oncological treatments, depending on the specific pharmacological profile disclosed.
Q2: How broad are the chemical claims generally in DE10249552?
A2: The claims typically utilize Markush structures to cover a wide array of derivatives, although the actual breadth depends on supporting data and claim language.
Q3: Can competitors legally develop similar compounds without infringing?
A3: They can if their compounds fall outside the claim scope or if they develop design-arounds that avoid the patented structures and uses.
Q4: What factors influence the patent’s enforceability?
A4: Clarity, support with experimental data, novelty over prior art, and the scope of claims all influence enforceability.
Q5: Are there known challenges or litigations related to DE10249552?
A5: Specific litigations cannot be confirmed without further research; however, pharmaceutical patents are frequently challenged on validity grounds, especially if claim scope is broad.
References:
[1] German Patent Database, DE10249552.
[2] European Patent Office, EP patent filings related to DE10249552.
[3] World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Patent Family Publications.
[4] Patent law literature on claim drafting and patent landscape analysis.
