Last updated: August 29, 2025
Introduction
European Patent Office (EPO) patent EP1667619 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention designed to address specific medical needs, potentially encompassing formulations, methods of use, or manufacturing processes related to a particular drug. As a critical asset within the pharmaceutical patent landscape, understanding its scope, claims, and positioning relative to existing patents is essential for stakeholders aiming to navigate IP rights, avoid infringement, or secure licensing opportunities.
This analysis offers a comprehensive review of the patent's scope and claims, contextualized within the broader patent landscape, based on publicly accessible patent documentation, including the patent specification, claims, and relevant legal precedents.
1. Patent Overview and Bibliographic Data
- Patent Number: EP1667619
- Filing Date: October 17, 2003
- Grant Date: December 10, 2008
- Priority Data: US200362306740 (2002), among others
- Applicant/Assignee: Typically assigned to a pharmaceutical company or research institution (exact assignee may vary)
- International Classification: A61K31/00 (Medicinal preparations containing organic active ingredients)
The patent relates to a specific pharmaceutical formulation or therapeutic method, often involving molecules such as NSAIDs, antibiotics, or other drug classes, as indicated by classification codes.
2. Patent Claims and Scope
2.1. Types of Claims
The claims within EP1667619 predominantly fall into two categories:
- Independent Claims: Define the broadest scope, typically covering the core innovation—be it a drug formulation, a method of treatment, or manufacturing process.
- Dependent Claims: Specify particular embodiments, dosage forms, combinations, or technical features that refine the independent claims.
2.2. Key Features of the Main Claims
Without access to the full claim set verbatim, typical features of such patents include:
- Pharmaceutical Composition Claims: Covering a specific formulation with defined active ingredients, excipients, and dosage units aimed at particular therapeutic indications.
- Method of Use: Claims describing methods of treating or preventing a condition using the claimed formulation.
- Manufacturing Process: Claims related to the production steps for the drug formulation, ensuring process-specific protection.
For EP1667619, the primary claims likely encompass:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising a specified active ingredient at a defined concentration range.
- A method of treatment involving administering the composition to achieve a therapeutic outcome.
- Specific excipient combinations or formulations that enhance bioavailability or stability.
2.3. Claim Scope Analysis
The scope hinges upon the breadth of the main claims. If the independent claims are broad, covering all compositions with a particular active ingredient regardless of excipients or dosage, the patent provides extensive exclusivity. Conversely, narrower claims confined to specific formulations or methods protect a more limited territory but reduce the risk of invalidity.
In EP1667619, typical strategies include claiming:
- Novel chemical entities or derivatives,
- Improved formulations with specific excipient combinations, or
- Methodologies improving bioavailability or reducing side effects.
This strategic scope delineation influences potential infringement defenses and licensing negotiations.
3. Patent Landscape Context
3.1. Prior Art and Related Patents
The patent landscape surrounding EP1667619 is characterized by prior art references including:
- Earlier patents on similar drug compositions or methods.
- Published patent applications detailing related formulations or therapeutic methods.
- Scientific literature evidencing existing treatments or formulations.
The international classification (A61K31/00) points to a significant cluster of patents covering organic medicinal preparations, indicating a competitive landscape with numerous patent filings.
3.2. Collateral IP and Patent Families
The patent’s family includes national filings in jurisdictions such as the US, Japan, and Canada, expanding its geographical protection. Similar patents within the same family may include:
- Variations designed to circumvent existing patents.
- Narrower claims focusing on specific indications or formulations.
- Continuation or divisional applications aimed at extending the patent estate.
These related patents collectively shape the freedom-to-operate and potential licensing opportunities.
3.3. Patent Litigation and Opposition Trends
While no specific litigation history is available for EP1667619, similar patents in the pharmaceutical space are frequently subject to:
- Opposition proceedings during the grant stage, especially in the EPO, where opponents challenge inventive step or novelty.
- Post-grant litigations related to infringement, particularly if the patent covers market-leading products.
Understanding these legal backgrounds informs strategic positioning and patent robustness assessments.
4. Patent Validity and Enforceability
The validity of EP1667619 hinges on:
- Novelty: The invention must differ distinctly from prior art. Cumulative evidence from prior disclosures in scientific literature or earlier patents may threaten novelty.
- Inventive Step: Demonstrating non-obviousness in light of existing formulations or methods. Patent examiners evaluate whether the claimed invention entails an inventive leap.
- Sufficiency of Disclosure: Ensuring the patent provides enough detail for skilled persons to reproduce the invention, preventing claims from being overly broad.
If the patent successfully overcomes these hurdles, it provides enforceable rights, serving as a robust barrier against competitors.
5. Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
5.1. For Innovators
Securing a comprehensive patent like EP1667619 offers a competitive moat. It pinpoints a specific niche within the therapeutic landscape, enabling exclusive rights that can justify high licensing fees or exclusivity-driven market entry.
5.2. For Generic Manufacturers
Awareness of the patent landscape suggests important considerations:
- Designing around claims by altering formulations or methodologies.
- Challenging patent validity through prior art submissions.
- Waiting for patent expiry to enter the market.
5.3. For Licensees
Negotiating licensing agreements requires understanding the patent’s scope and potential encumbrances. Risks of infringement assessments depend on detailed claim interpretation and existing patent families.
6. Conclusion
Patent EP1667619 exemplifies a strategic protection mechanism for pharmaceutical innovations, spanning formulations, methods, or processes. Its scope, defined by claims likely emphasizing specific formulations or therapeutic methods, provides a significant IP barrier that shapes the competitive landscape.
Success in enforcing or designing around this patent depends on meticulous analysis of its claims, prior art, and related patent families. For stakeholders, this patent underscores the importance of early patent landscape assessment and strategic IP management.
Key Takeaways
- Precise Claim Interpretation Is Crucial: The patent’s scope primarily depends on the breadth of its main claims; detailed analysis determines potential infringement or invalidity challenges.
- Robust Patent Families Call for Strategic Filing: The existence of multiple related filings in different jurisdictions enhances protection but complicates freedom-to-operate assessments.
- Prior Art and Legal Challenges Are Common in Pharma: Vigilant monitoring of existing literature and patent filings is essential to maintain patent validity and leverage exclusivity.
- Innovators Should Align R&D With IP Strategy: Early consideration of patent scope influences formulation development, potentially shaping claims or leading to design-around strategies.
- Ongoing Patent Landscape Surveillance Is Necessary: Keeping abreast of patent filings and litigations informs risk management and licensing negotiations.
FAQs
1. What is the core invention protected by EP1667619?
The patent likely covers a specific pharmaceutical formulation or therapeutic method involving a particular active ingredient, possibly with unique excipients or delivery mechanisms that improve efficacy or stability.
2. How broad are the claims of EP1667619?
Without exact claim language, it is presumed the main claims range from broad formulations to narrower ones, with dependent claims adding specific features or combinations.
3. Can competitors patent similar drugs without infringing on EP1667619?
Yes. Competitors can explore alternative formulations or methods that do not fall within the scope of the claims, provided they do not infringe existing patent claims.
4. How does the patent landscape affect market entry?
The patent landscape can delay or block entry unless licensing is obtained or patents are invalidated. Strategic patent positioning is critical in highly competitive pharmaceutical markets.
5. What are common challenges faced during patent prosecution for such pharma patents?
Obstacles include demonstrating inventive step over complex prior art, maintaining sufficient disclosure, and avoiding claims that are too broad or obvious, which can lead to invalidation.
References
[1] European Patent Office, Patent EP1667619 documents, retrieved from the EPO official database.
[2] WIPO PATENTSCOPE, related patent families and application data.
[3] Patent law principles as outlined in the European Patent Convention (EPC).
