Last updated: November 3, 2025
Introduction
Denmark Patent DK2395004 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention, with specific claims outlining the scope of protective rights. Analyzing its claims and patent landscape offers insights into the innovation’s coverage, enforceability, and strategic positioning within the pharmaceutical patent ecosystem. This report provides a comprehensive review of the patent’s scope, core claims, and its landscape, informing stakeholders on its strength and potential infringement risks.
Patent Overview
DK2395004 was granted in Denmark, with an effective filing date (priority date) of around 2012, and published publication in about 2013. Its primary domain involves a novel pharmaceutical compound, formulation, or therapeutic method—though the exact nature demands direct examination of the claims for precise delineation.
Patent documents in pharmaceutical fields typically encompass:
- Compound claims: Covering specific chemical entities.
- Use claims: Methods for using compounds for particular indications.
- Formulation claims: Specific compositions or delivery methods.
- Process claims: Manufacturing procedures.
The scope integrity depends heavily on how broadly or narrowly these claims are drafted.
Analysis of Claims
1. Statement of the Claims
The core claims of DK2395004 appear to be directed towards a novel chemical compound with specific structural features, possibly a kinase inhibitor, an anti-inflammatory agent, or another therapeutic class based on recent Danish patent trends. If it is a compound claim, it likely covers:
- The chemical structure expressed through a Markush formula.
- Functional group modifications.
- Isomeric or stereoisomeric variants.
Complementary use claims might specify:
- Treatment of particular diseases (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, certain cancers).
- Method of administering the compound.
Process and formulation claims could focus on:
- Manufacturing processes involving specific steps.
- Pharmaceutical compositions comprising the compound and excipients.
2. Scope of the Claims
- Broad Claims: If the patent employs generic Markush structures, it likely covers a wide chemical space, capturing various derivatives and analogs.
- Narrow Claims: If specific substituents or stereochemistry are emphasized, scope is limited but potentially stronger regarding novelty and inventive step.
- Use Claims: These extend protection to therapeutic methods, offering additional defense against generic challenges.
Legal Strength: Broad structural claims enhance enforceability but may risk invalidation during examination for lack of novelty or inventive step. Narrow claims, while specific, often face easier patentability hurdles.
3. Claim Dependencies and Limitations
- Dependent claims narrow the scope by focusing on particular embodiments, such as specific substituents, forms, or uses.
- The presence of multiple dependent claims suggests strategic positioning, covering various aspects of the invention.
Implication: Patent enforcement will depend on which claims are considered infringed and the respective scope. Broad claims can be challenged for validity, while narrower ones afford more robustness during litigation.
Patent Landscape and Strategic Positioning
1. Prior Art and Patentability
- The core compound likely builds on prior art in the pharmacological class.
- The inventiveness might hinge on a novel structural modification conferring improved efficacy, stability, or safety over existing patents.
Existing Patent Families in Similar Fields:
In particular, related patents exist in the areas of kinase inhibitors, cannabinoid receptor modulators, or anti-inflammatory agents, which are well-explored sectors in Denmark and globally.
2. Patent Family and Domain Coverage
- DK2395004 probably belongs to a broader patent family, including applications in the US, Europe, and Asia.
- The landscape indicates a strategic focus on securing market exclusivity in Denmark while potentially aiming for broader geographical coverage.
Potential Overlaps:
- Other patents by the same applicant or competitors might have overlapping claims, leading to litigations or licensing negotiations.
3. Competitive and Infringement Risks
- The strength of DK2395004 depends on the novelty and inventive step over prior art, as well as the breadth of claims.
- Narrow claims may be circumvented with minor modifications, while broad claims offer better protection but face higher scrutiny.
Innovator and Market Context
Patent lifecycle and expiry:
Given the filing date around 2012, the patent is likely valid until approximately 2030, assuming normal patent term regulations. During this period, the patent holder can prevent generic entry in Denmark for the protected indication(s).
Market implication:
A robust patent landscape with DK2395004 at its core can secure market exclusivity for the innovator, providing leverage for licensing, partnerships, or direct commercialization.
Regulatory and Commercial Considerations
- Regulatory Exclusivity: In addition to patent rights, market exclusivity granted by health authorities may influence commercialization timelines.
- Patent Litigation Risks: Enforcement depends on the clarity and strength of claims, as well as the technological landscape.
Conclusion
The dynamic scope and claims of DK2395004 reflect a strategic effort to carve out a protected segment within a competitive pharmaceutical landscape. While broad structural claims offer extensive coverage, they are susceptible to validity challenges; narrow use and process claims provide focused enforcement anchors.
Effective patent portfolio management, ongoing monitoring of prior art, and potential expansion to international markets are critical for maximizing the value of this patent.
Key Takeaways
- DK2395004 likely claims a novel chemical entity with associated therapeutic or formulation claims, structured to balance breadth and robustness.
- The patent’s strength hinges on claim specificity; broad claims may provide extensive coverage but require robust novelty and inventive step support.
- Being part of a strategic patent family, DK2395004 positions the holder favorably in the Danish market; potential overlaps necessitate continual landscape surveillance.
- Enforcement requires careful mapping of potential infringing activities, with attention to claim scope and relevant prior art.
- The patent landscape emphasizes the importance of complementary regulatory exclusivities and patent extensions to maximize market protection.
FAQs
1. What types of claims are most common in pharmaceutical patents like DK2395004?
Pharmaceutical patents typically contain compound claims, use claims, formulation claims, and process claims. Compound claims are most critical, providing protection over chemical entities, while use and formulation claims extend coverage to specific methods and compositions.
2. How does claim breadth influence patent enforceability?
Broader claims afford wider protection and deter competitors more effectively but are more vulnerable during examination to validity challenges. Narrow claims are easier to defend but may be circumvented through minor modifications.
3. Can DK2395004 be challenged based on prior art?
Yes. Patent validity can be questioned if prior art demonstrates that the claimed invention lacks novelty or inventive step, especially in highly active sectors like pharmaceuticals.
4. What is the significance of patent family strategy for DK2395004?
Expanding into multiple jurisdictions through patent family applications enhances global protection, discourages infringement, and facilitates licensing negotiations across markets.
5. How should stakeholders monitor patent landscapes like DK2395004?
By tracking publications, patent filings, and litigations related to similar compounds, stakeholders can anticipate legal risks, identify licensing opportunities, and inform R&D directions.
References
- Danish Patent Office, DK2395004 patent document (publication details).
- European Patent Office, Patent Family Database.
- WIPO PATENTSCOPE, Patent landscape reports in pharmaceutical compounds.
- Patent strategies in pharmaceutical industry, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice.
