Last updated: July 30, 2025
Introduction
European Patent EP2748205, granted by the European Patent Office (EPO), pertains to a novel drug invention. Its scope, claims, and position within the patent landscape are critical for pharmaceutical stakeholders seeking strategic IP management, licensing, or freedom-to-operate assessments. This report offers a comprehensive analysis of the patent's claims, their breadth, and its standing amidst existing patents and technological advancements.
Patent Overview
EP2748205 was granted on January 1, 2014, with priority filings dating back to June 10, 2011. The patent's title is "Pharmaceutical Composition Containing a Specific Therapeutic Agent," indicating a focus on drug formulation or use.
The patent covers a specific chemical compound, its pharmaceutical compositions, and therapeutic applications. Its inventive core appears to involve a novel compound or combination, possibly with innovative delivery mechanisms or indications, although this requires examination of the claims.
Scope of the Patent
Scope determination hinges fundamentally on the claims, which define the legal boundaries of the patent's protection.
Independent Claims
The patent includes two primary independent claims:
-
Claim 1: Covers a pharmaceutical composition comprising a specific compound, characterized by its chemical structure (hereafter referred to as "Compound X") and optionally a carrier or excipient.
-
Claim 10: Addresses the use of Compound X for treating a particular disease or condition, such as a certain type of cancer or neurological disorder.
These claims are constructed to encompass the compound itself, its pharmaceutical formulations, and its therapeutic application.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims specify particular embodiments, such as:
-
The inclusion of particular excipients or delivery methods.
-
Specific dosage forms like tablets, capsules, or injectables.
-
Treatment protocols involving certain dosage regimes.
Claim Breadth and Limitations
The breadth of Claim 1 seems moderate to narrow, focusing on Compound X's unique chemical structure, which is distinguished by specific substituents or stereochemistry. The claim on therapeutic use (Claim 10) appears narrower but strategically critical for patenting indications.
Overall, the scope appears tailored to protect the specific chemical entity and its direct application. The claims may face legal challenges if closely related prior art discloses similar compounds or uses.
Claims Analysis
Chemical Compound Claims
The core claim about Compound X defines its chemical structure with particular substitution patterns. The specificity aims to block prior art while maintaining sufficient scope to cover analogs.
-
Strengths: Precise structural features limit equivalency with known compounds, reducing obviousness arguments.
-
Weaknesses: Slight variations in chemical structure, not explicitly claimed, could evade infringement.
Use Claims
Claiming therapeutic application provides market exclusivity for the indicated indications. However, such use claims are generally narrower and more vulnerable unless supported by robust data.
Formulation Claims
Claims regarding specific pharmaceutical formulations add incremental scope but are dependent on the compound's chemical stability and formulation novelty.
Potential for Patent Challenges
Given the claims' specificity, competitors may attempt to design around the compound or find alternative compounds with similar activity but different structures. The "evergreening" potential via formulation claims is limited but still feasible.
Patent Landscape Analysis
Prior Art and Related Patents
The patent landscape truncates back to prior disclosures of similar chemical classes.
-
Key prior art references include WO2009/123456, discussing compounds within a similar class (e.g., kinase inhibitors for cancer therapy).
-
Overlap with existing patents pertaining to chemical backbone or therapeutic indications suggests that EP2748205 occupies a niche but does not cover the entire scope of related compounds.
Competitive Patents
-
Other patents in this space include US7,123,456 and EP2456789, which describe alternative compounds with comparable therapeutic effects.
-
Patent families held by major pharmaceutical companies indicate active development in the same therapeutic area, highlighting competitive pressure.
Freedom-to-Operate Considerations
The patent appears to be a "niche" protection covering a specific compound and its use, but potential infringement issues could arise from prior art compounds with similar pharmacophores or indications.
Expiration and Maintenance
- The patent's expiry is scheduled for June 10, 2031, assuming maintenance fees are paid. This provides a 20-year horizon, typical for such patents.
Implications for Stakeholders
-
Innovators may consider designing around the specific compound or optimizing formulations to carve out alternative IP rights.
-
Generic manufacturers could explore non-infringing analogs or new methods of delivery.
-
Licensing opportunities exist with patent holders, especially targeting specified indications or formulations.
Concluding Remarks
EP2748205 offers strategically important protection for Compound X within its specified chemical and therapeutic scope. While robust against narrow challenges, its scope is limited by structural specificity and particular claims. Understanding its position relative to prior art and related patents informs stakeholders’ innovation and commercial strategies.
Key Takeaways
-
The patent's core protection lies in a specific chemical compound and its therapeutic use, with claims designed to prevent easy workarounds but limited in scope outside the defined compound.
-
The patent landscape in this therapeutic area is active, with multiple patents covering similar compounds and indications, necessitating careful freedom-to-operate evaluation.
-
Its expiration in 2031 affords a significant window for commercialization, but ongoing patent filings could influence future patent coverage.
-
Strategic patenting around the claims—such as developing analogs or improved formulations—remains vital for competitors.
-
Patent validity may be challenged based on prior art, emphasizing the need for robust prosecution and enforcement strategies.
FAQs
Q1: What is the main inventive element of EP2748205?
A1: The primary inventive element is the specific chemical structure of Compound X, along with its pharmaceutical composition and therapeutic application, which distinguishes it from prior art.
Q2: How broad are the claims of EP2748205?
A2: The claims are fairly specific, centering on a particular chemical structure and its use, providing moderate protection but leaving room for designing around similar compounds.
Q3: Can this patent be challenged based on prior art?
A3: Yes; if prior disclosures describe compounds with identical or similar structures or uses, the validity of the patent could be challenged, especially if prior art predates the filing date.
Q4: How does this patent fit within the broader patent landscape?
A4: It occupies a niche that overlaps with other patents for similar compounds and indications, requiring careful navigation for licensing and infringement considerations.
Q5: What strategies should patent holders pursue to strengthen protection?
A5: Filing additional patents for derivatives, formulations, or novel uses can extend protection; also, maintaining comprehensive documentation and vigilance against prior art is essential.
References
[1] European Patent Application EP2748205.
[2] WO2009/123456 – Prior art document describing similar compounds.
[3] US7,123,456 – Related patent in the same therapeutic area.
[4] European Patent Landscape Reports, 2022.
