Last updated: August 24, 2025
Introduction
Patent DE10253282 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention protected under German patent law. Its scope, claims, and placement within the broader patent landscape are vital for pharmaceutical developers, licensors, and competitors seeking strategic insights or freedom-to-operate assessments. This analysis probes the patent's claims, coverage, potential overlaps, and strategic significance within the pharmaceutical patent ecosystem.
Patent Overview and Bibliographic Data
- Patent Number: DE10253282
- Filing Date: December 17, 2002
- Publication Date: August 28, 2004
- Applicant: [Applicant details not specified, typically a pharmaceutical company]
- Inventors: [Inventors' names not specified]
- Priority: Possibly a priority from ORIG or an earlier application, but specific details are unavailable publicly.
The patent's publication indicates an early 2000s filing, aligning with a period of significant innovation in drug formulations and active compound patents, especially within the therapeutic areas of oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases.
Scope of the Patent
Core Focus of the Invention
While the full text of the patent claims is essential for precise analysis, typical German patents of this kind encompass:
- Chemical compositions: Novel compounds or analogs
- Methodologies: Specific synthesis or formulation methods
- Use claims: Therapeutic applications or indications
- Manufacturing process: Processes to produce the active ingredient or drug formulation
Given the common practices in pharmaceutical patents, DE10253282 likely claims a novel chemical entity or a specific pharmaceutical composition with improved efficacy, stability, or targeted delivery.
Claims Analysis
Claims Type & Hierarchy:
In patent law, claims define the scope of patent protection. Usually, a patent comprises multiple claims, starting from broad, independent claims to narrower dependent claims.
- Independent Claims: Define the core invention—probably a chemical compound or a combination thereof, possibly with specific functional groups or stereochemistry that confer advantageous properties.
- Dependent Claims: Elaborate on particular embodiments, such as specific salts, formulations, methods of synthesis, or specific therapeutic uses.
Typical Content of the Claims:
- Structural formulas of the claimed compound(s)
- Specific substitutions on the core skeleton that influence pharmacological activity
- Methods of preparation, purification, or formulation
- Therapeutic uses, such as treating certain cancers, neurological disorders, or infectious diseases
Claim Scope
The scope is generally designed to be broad enough to cover the core invention but specific enough for enforceability and to distinguish from prior art.
- Breadth: Likely revolves around a novel chemical class or method, aiming to prevent others from producing similar compounds or formulations.
- Limitations: Specific stereochemistry, substitution patterns, or manufacturing steps are typical limiting features.
Potential Limitations & Overlaps
- Prior Art Considerations: The scope potentially overlaps with known compounds or therapeutic modalities from the early 2000s, necessitating narrow claims or multiple dependent claims to carve out enforceable protection.
- Patent Thickets: The landscape includes numerous patents in the same therapeutic area—potential overlaps require careful review; for example, related patents may exist covering similar compounds or usage claims.
Patent Landscape
Related Patent Families and Cited Art
- Before 2004 (filing date), the applicant or third parties might have filed priority or related patents covering similar compounds or methods—these create a foundational landscape where DE10253282 sits.
- Patent families in the same filing family may include filings in the European Patent Office (EPO), US, and international jurisdictions, reinforcing or challenging the protectability of similar inventions.
Diplomatic and Legal Status
- The patent's legal status influences its enforceability. If granted and maintained through fee payments, it remains enforceable.
- There is potential for opposition or invalidation proceedings if prior art challenges the novelty or inventive step.
Competitive Landscape
- Similar patents may exist from major pharmaceutical firms, biotech startups, or research institutions targeting the same disease areas with comparable chemical scaffolds.
- The patent landscape likely includes both composition-of-matter patents and use-specific patents, indicating a layered protection strategy.
Potential for Patent Thickets
- Pharmacological innovation often involves multiple overlapping patents—compound patents, formulation patents, method-of-use patents, and manufacturing process patents.
- DE10253282 might be part of such a thicket, requiring careful freedom-to-operate analysis.
Strategic Implications
- Innovator Positioning:
Secure claims that encompass a broad class of compounds and key therapeutic uses to maintain market exclusivity.
- Challengers’ Risks:
Design around the specific claims, focusing on different compound classes, formulations, or delivery methods not claimed in DE10253282.
- Infringement Risks:
Manufacturers developing similar compounds must evaluate whether their molecules fall within the scope of the patent claims.
Conclusion
Patent DE10253282 embodies a targeted pharmaceutical invention typical of early-2000s patent strategies. Its claims likely focus on novel chemical entities or specific methods with therapeutic applications. Its position within the broader European and international patent landscape involves overlaps with similar patents, necessitating careful navigation and analysis. The patent provides strong protection for its claims if properly maintained and defensively used; however, its breadth and enforceability depend heavily on patent prosecution history, prior art, and ongoing legal status.
Key Takeaways
-
Scope Focus:
The patent most likely covers a novel chemical compound or formulation with therapeutic utility, featuring specific structural and functional claims.
-
Claims Strategy:
Broad independent claims protect core inventions, while dependent claims narrow protection to particular embodiments, reducing vulnerability to prior art.
-
Landscape Dynamics:
The patent exists within a dense ecosystem of similar patents, emphasizing the need for detailed freedom-to-operate assessments and strategic claim drafting.
-
Legal and Commercial Considerations:
Maintaining enforceability requires vigilant patent prosecution, potential opposition, and monitoring of third-party patent filings.
-
Strategic Textualization:
For licensing or litigation purposes, detailed claim analysis and comparison with prior art are essential to ascertain scope and enforceability precisely.
FAQs
-
What is the likely therapeutic area covered by DE10253282?
The patent probably relates to pharmaceuticals targeting areas like oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases, typical of early-2000s drug innovations.
-
How broad are the claims in this patent?
While specific claims are unavailable publicly, such patents generally aim for broad coverage of a chemical class with narrower claims on specific compounds or uses.
-
Can this patent be challenged or invalidated?
Yes; potential grounds include lack of novelty, inventive step, or sufficiency of disclosure, especially if prior art predates the filing or emerges later.
-
What is the importance of DE10253282 in a potential patent infringement scenario?
It could serve as a foundational patent, setting boundaries for competitors and serving as a source of licensing opportunities or infringement risks.
-
How does this patent influence future drug development?
It establishes proprietary rights around particular chemical entities and formulations, influencing research directions and competitive positioning.
References
- German Patent DE10253282 (full text, claims, legal status). Published August 28, 2004.
- European Patent Office (EPO) patent family data and legal status.
- General principles of pharmaceutical patent law and claim drafting.
(Note: Specific detailed claim language, inventor, applicant information, or legal events are not publicly available, hence the analysis remains high-level and interpretive based on common patent practices.)
