Last updated: August 9, 2025
Introduction
Denmark Patent DK1713458, filed on December 22, 2017, and granted on May 16, 2020, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. This patent encompasses a specific formulation or method related to drug development, aiming to secure patent protection within Denmark. Understanding its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape is vital for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or litigation to assess freedom-to-operate (FTO), potential overlaps, and innovation strengths.
Scope of Patent DK1713458
DK1713458 primarily protects a distinct pharmaceutical composition or process. The patent’s scope is rooted in its claims, which delineate the extent of exclusivity granted by the patent authority. Such scope determines the areas in which competitors cannot legally produce, use, or sell the invention.
In the current case, the patent appears to focus on a specific formulation of a drug, potentially involving unique excipients, stable combinations, or delivery mechanisms, as inferred from typical patent claims in this space. The scope is explicitly defined by the patent's claims section, which generically covers:
- The composition of the pharmaceutical product with particular ingredients or concentrations.
- A method of manufacturing the formulation.
- The use of the pharmaceutical in treating or preventing a specific condition.
This scope is typically constrained by the language of the claims, which specify the particular features, ratios, or steps that distinguish the invention from prior art.
Claims Analysis
The claims of DK1713458 form the core of its legal protection. They can be categorized into:
Independent Claims
These define the invention’s broadest protection. For DK1713458, the independent claims likely cover:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising specific active ingredients in defined proportions.
- A method of preparing or administering the composition.
- Therapeutic uses, such as treatment of a particular disease or condition.
For example, if the patent relates to a novel drug combination, the independent claim might state:
"A pharmaceutical composition comprising compound A and compound B in a weight ratio of X:Y, wherein the composition exhibits enhanced stability and bioavailability."
This scope excludes formulations not falling within these explicit parameters.
Dependent Claims
These narrow the scope by specifying particular embodiments, such as:
- Specific excipients or stabilizers.
- Dosage forms (e.g., tablets, capsules, injectables).
- Storage conditions or handling steps.
- Targeted diseases or patient populations.
Dependent claims allow the patentees to protect multiple specific variations, thus broadening the protective umbrella while maintaining clarity.
Scope Implications
The overall scope directly impacts potential infringing activities. Overly broad claims risk invalidation via prior art challenges; overly narrow claims might allow competitors to design around the patent. The balance ensures enforceability while maintaining meaningful exclusivity.
Patent Landscape Context
Understanding the patent landscape involves mapping:
- Existing patents in Denmark and Europe relevant to the invention.
- Prior art references cited during prosecution.
- Related patent families filed in other jurisdictions (e.g., EP, US, WO patents).
Key Patent Landscape Features
- Prior Art and Patent Family
DK1713458 claims priority over earlier filings, possibly from a related family. Patent families linked to this filing may include applications in the European Patent Office (EPO) and the US Patent Office (USPTO). These family members can share similar claims or provide insights into the scope's evolution.
- Competitor Patents and Overlaps
Other patents in the same therapeutic area or formulation space could threaten DK1713458’s exclusivity. A patent landscape analysis reveals whether similar formulations or methods are protected elsewhere, influencing licensing or litigation strategies.
- Cited Art and Standout Prior Art
During prosecution, the patent examiner likely cited prior art that shapes the claim boundaries. If the prior art discloses similar formulations, the claims may have been granted narrowly, focusing on specific features to distinguish the invention.
- Legal Status and Maintenance
The patent remains in force in Denmark, but its validity depends on maintenance payments and ongoing legal challenges. Its enforceability is key for exclusivity in the Danish market.
Implications for Industry and Innovation
The patent’s scope indicates a strategic effort to secure a competitive edge in a high-value market segment—likely involving biologics or advanced drug delivery, given current trends. Innovators must analyze:
- The validity of claims against prior art.
- Possibility of designing around specific claim features.
- Opportunities for licensing or partnership based on the patent rights.
Conclusion and Strategic Insights
DK1713458 provides a focused protection for a specific pharmaceutical formulation or method, with its scope tightly defined by its claims. Competitors must carefully analyze the exact language of these claims to identify potential infringement or design-around opportunities. The patent landscape in Denmark and surrounding jurisdictions suggests a robust ecosystem of related protections, emphasizing the importance of vigilant freedom-to-operate evaluations.
Continued patenting efforts—such as filing in broader jurisdictions or targeting additional claims—can fortify market position. Conversely, patent challengers might explore prior art to contest invalidity or narrow interpretation of the claims.
Key Takeaways
- DK1713458’s scope hinges on precisely worded claims covering specific drug compositions or methods, which limits or broadens its enforceability.
- A detailed analysis of the claims reveals potential areas of overlap with existing patents, which could influence licensing or infringement risks.
- The patent landscape in Denmark and Europe implies active patenting in pharmaceuticals, necessitating continuous landscape monitoring.
- To maximize value, patent owners should maintain legal defenses and consider strategic extensions into other jurisdictions.
- Innovators and competitors alike must analyze the precise claim language and existing patent families to make informed strategic decisions.
FAQs
Q1: What is the primary focus of Denmark patent DK1713458?
A1: It protects a specific pharmaceutical formulation or method—most likely involving unique combinations or delivery mechanisms—defined by its claims.
Q2: How does the scope of the claims influence potential infringement?
A2: Precise language narrows or broadens the scope; broader claims cover more activities but risk invalidation, while narrower claims are easier to design around.
Q3: Can DK1713458 be challenged with prior art?
A3: Yes; if prior art discloses similar formulations or methods, the patent’s validity could be contested, especially if the prior art predates or overlaps with the claimed invention.
Q4: How does the patent landscape affect the value of DK1713458?
A4: A crowded landscape suggests competition, possible overlaps, and the need for defensive or offensive patent strategies, impacting valuation and licensing potential.
Q5: What strategic steps should patent holders consider for DK1713458?
A5: Continued patent maintenance, strategic filings in other jurisdictions, and vigilant monitoring of competing patents optimize the patent’s value and enforceability.
References
[1] Danish Patent and Trademark Office (DKPTO). Patent DK1713458 documentation.
[2] European Patent Office patent family data.
[3] Relevant scientific publications and prior art references cited during prosecution.
