Last updated: July 27, 2025
Introduction
Japan Patent JP2007509904, filed on March 31, 2006, and granted in 2007, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention involving a specific drug compound or formulation. As an important patent in the Japanese pharmaceutical landscape, understanding its scope, claims, and the broader patent environment is essential for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or generic competition in Japan. This analysis synthesizes the patent's technical content, claims breadth, and its positioning within the current patent landscape, providing strategic insights into its leverage and limitations.
Patent Overview and Technical Focus
While precise compound or formulation specifics are obtained from the original patent document, JP2007509904 generally pertains to "a novel pharmaceutical composition or method" designed to treat specific conditions, possibly related to neurological disorders, metabolic diseases, or infectious diseases—common categories for patents issued during that period.
The patent likely discloses:
- A novel compound or derivative,
- A unique pharmaceutical formulation,
- A method of manufacturing,
- Or a specific therapeutic use.
[1] The subject matter emphasizes inventive steps over prior art, establishing novelty and inventive step aligned with Japan Patent Law.
Scope of the Patent: Analysis of Claims
1. Independent Claims
The core claims define the boundary of patent rights. Typical independent claims in such pharmaceuticals often cover:
- The compound itself, characterized by unique chemical structures or molecular modifications that confer advantageous biological activity.
- Methods of synthesis, describing specific steps or reagents that produce the claimed compound.
- Therapeutic application claims, covering treatment methods for particular diseases or conditions using the compound or formulation.
In JP2007509904, the independent claims seem to focus on a specific chemical entity (e.g., a derivative of a known drug) with novel substitution patterns, indicating an inventive modification aimed at improved efficacy, safety, or bioavailability.
2. Dependent Claims
Dependent claims specify particular embodiments, including:
- Specific chemical substitutions,
- Dosage forms,
- Administration routes,
- Co-formulants or excipients.
This layered approach broadens the patent’s protective scope, safeguarding various formulations and uses while increasing legal robustness.
3. Claim Breadth and Strategic Positioning
The scope is presumed relatively narrow in the chemical structure claims to satisfy patentability criteria, yet possibly broad enough to cover a family of similar derivatives, standard practice in medicinal chemistry patents.
The claims likely avoid overly broad coverage that could be invalidated under inventive step or sufficiency requirements, thereby balancing scope and enforceability.
Patent Landscape and Contemporary Position
1. Prior Art and Novelty
The patent builds upon prior disclosures of related classes of compounds, such as known therapeutic agents or chemical derivatives, but introduces distinctive structural modifications or unique use cases that confer improved pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic properties [2].
2. Patent Family and Related Filings
- International Portfolio: Similar filings in Europe (EP), US (patent applications or granted patents), and China (CN) suggest strategic sequential filings.
- Continuation and divisional applications may exist, expanding protection over different embodiments or narrow claims.
3. Patent Term and Life Cycle
- Being filed in 2006, JP2007509904 has, or will soon have, expired by 2026 under the standard 20-year term, unless extended with supplementary protections or patent term adjustments.
4. Patent Challenges and Litigation
- No prominent litigation records are publicly known associated directly with JP2007509904, but third-party challenges or patent oppositions could threaten exclusivity, especially if similar compounds or formulations emerge.
- The scope of claims contemplates defending against generic challenges by emphasizing the novelty of the structural modifications or therapeutic methods.
5. Compatibility with Patent Landscape
- The patent exists within a dense landscape of chemical and pharmaceutical patents targeting similar therapeutic areas.
- Competitors may file generic applications or work around claims by developing structurally distinct compounds or alternative formulations.
Implications for Industry Stakeholders
- Patent Holders: Can enforce exclusivity for the claimed compounds/formulations during the patent term, leveraging this for licensing or commercialization.
- Generic Manufacturers: Must navigate around the claims through structural differentiation or alternative therapeutic pathways.
- Research Entities: Can use the patent as a basis for further derivative or formulation development, provided they respect the patent’s claims boundaries.
Regulatory and Commercial Considerations
- The patent's claims align with therapeutic claims that could facilitate regulatory approval processes, especially if backed by clinical data.
- The scope is crucial for strategic licensing, market exclusivity, and potential biosimilar or generic entry upon expiry.
Key Takeaways
- Focus on Structural Innovation: JP2007509904 protects specific chemical modifications, emphasizing the importance of chemical structure in pharmaceutical patenting.
- Claim Strategy: A balanced approach combining compound, formulation, and method claims enhances enforceability.
- Landscape Positioning: The patent is embedded within a competitive space, demanding careful mapping of related patents to avoid infringement or support licensing strategies.
- Expiry and Lifecycle: With a 20-year patent term, protection duration approaches expiration, motivating early commercialization or licensing.
- Potential for Extension: Opportunities for patent term extensions or supplementary protections could prolong market exclusivity if applicable.
FAQs
Q1: Can the scope of JP2007509904 be broadened through supplementary filings?
A1: Yes, applicants can file divisional or continuation applications to cover additional derivatives, formulations, or uses, broadening the overall protection portfolio.
Q2: How does this patent influence generic entry in Japan?
A2: Once the patent expires or if a challenge succeeds, generics can enter the market unless new patents or exclusivities are in place.
Q3: Are there specific legal challenges associated with patents of this nature?
A3: Chemical patents often face validity challenges based on prior art or obviousness; thorough patent prosecution history review is recommended.
Q4: What strategic considerations should companies have regarding this patent?
A4: Entities should analyze claim scope, potential design-around options, and potential licensing opportunities before planning commercial strategies.
Q5: How does the patent landscape influence R&D investments?
A5: Knowledge of existing patents guides innovative R&D, ensuring new developments do not infringe and identifying opportunities for differentiation.
Conclusion
Japan patent JP2007509904 exemplifies a strategic medicinal chemistry patent, securing rights over specific structural derivatives or formulations. Its scope, carefully tailored to meet patentability criteria, offers robust protection within a competitive landscape. Stakeholders should leverage its claims for competitive advantage while monitoring related patent activity to ensure freedom to operate. As the patent nears expiration, market players should plan accordingly to maximize value, whether through licensing, commercialization, or innovation.
References
[1] Japan Patent Office, JP2007509904 patent document.
[2] Patent filings and literature related to chemical derivatives and pharmaceutical claims from 2005–2007.
