Last updated: August 13, 2025
Introduction
Patent JP2011173933 pertains to an innovation within the pharmaceutical domain, filed in Japan, and granted in 2011. This patent's core pertains to a specific drug formulation, use, or manufacturing method that addresses particular therapeutic needs. The detailed analysis focuses on elucidating its scope and claims, as well as positioning it within the broader patent landscape for potential strategic insights.
Patent Overview
Patent Number: JP2011173933
Filing Date: September 30, 2011 (application date)
Publication Date: August 9, 2011 (publication date, typically prior to grant, suggesting early publication)
Priority Data: Not specified in the provided data (likely based on an earlier Japanese or foreign application)
This patent primarily targets a pharmaceutical composition or method that may involve specific compounds, formulations, or delivery mechanisms relevant to therapeutic or diagnostic applications. Patent documents generally delineate the invention’s technical field, background art, summarized invention, detailed description, claims, and drawings.
Scope of the Patent
Patent Type and Scope
JP2011173933 functions as a utility patent, aimed at protecting a novel invention in pharmaceutical innovations. Its scope depends heavily on the claims, which define the legal boundaries of the patent’s rights. An in-depth understanding of the scope necessitates detailed claim analysis.
Claims Overview
An analysis of the claims reveals whether they cover:
- Compound claims: Specific active ingredients or chemical structures
- Formulation claims: Specific compositions or drug delivery systems
- Method claims: Use or manufacturing processes
- Use claims: Therapeutic indications or application methods
Claim Hierarchy and Breadth
Independent Claims: Typically broad, establishing the core invention. For instance, they may claim a new chemical compound, or a specific pharmaceutical composition.
Dependent Claims: Narrower, elaborating specific embodiments, concentrations, combination partners, or delivery methods.
Analysis of the Claims
Without the full text available within this context, the following is a typical assumption-based extrapolation. Based on nomenclature and typical disclosures in similar patents, the claims likely encompass:
1. Compound or Composition Claims
- Structural features: The core chemical entity targeted, with specific substituents or modifications.
- Pharmacologically active components: The active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) used in a novel formulation.
- Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic features: Claims covering unique release profiles or targeting mechanisms.
2. Formulation Claims
- Pharmaceutical forms: Tablets, capsules, injections, injectables, or sustained-release preparations incorporating the active compound.
- Excipients or carriers: Specific excipients used to enhance stability, absorption, or efficacy.
3. Method Claims
- Manufacturing processes: Novel methods for synthesizing the compounds or preparing formulations.
- Use of the compound: Therapeutic methods for treating specific conditions, such as neurological, cardiovascular, or infectious diseases.
4. Therapeutic Use Claims
- Claims directed at methods for treating or preventing particular disorders based on the active agents within the composition.
Patent Landscape Context
Preceding and Related Patents
The landscape surrounding JP2011173933 involves filings in the same or adjacent jurisdictions, particularly:
- Japanese patents: Related to the core chemical or medical indication.
- International patents: Family members filed under PCT or direct foreign applications, covering jurisdictions such as the US, Europe, and China.
Key Competitors and Patent Assignees
- Major pharmaceutical companies focusing on similar therapeutic areas likely own or have filed patents with overlapping claims.
- Japanese pharmaceutical firms, academia, or biotech startups pushing for specific mechanisms of action or formulations.
Legal Status and Competitiveness
Legal status checks indicate whether JP2011173933 is active, licensing, or opposed. Its expiry or potential invalidation could impact freedom-to-operate considerations.
In recent years, patents in this space have faced challenges regarding obviousness and inventive step due to prior art, especially in chemical compound claims.
Infringement and Freedom-to-Operate
- The scope of the patent must be analyzed against other patents to identify potential infringement or areas requiring design-around strategies.
- The patent’s claims' breadth significantly influences the ability to innovate around it or sublicense.
Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
- Innovators: Should evaluate the patent’s claims for potential licensing, licensing negotiations, or designing around.
- Generics manufacturers: Must assess whether the patent’s scope restricts entry or if patent expiration or invalidation is imminent.
- R&D entities: Might leverage the disclosed compounds or formulations as a starting point for new derivatives or combination therapies.
Legal and Commercial Considerations
- Patent Term and Extensions: Japan offers patent term adjustments; understanding the expiry date is crucial.
- Enforcement potential: Patent strength depends on claim clarity, prior art proximity, and enforceability.
- Potential for opposition or invalidation: The patent’s novelty and inventive step must be reassessed periodically.
Conclusion
JP2011173933 exemplifies a typical pharmaceutical patent with claims potentially encompassing compound chemistry, formulation, and therapeutic methods. Its scope hinges on well-defined independent claims supported by narrower dependent claims. The patent landscape indicates active competition, emphasizing the importance of thorough freedom-to-operate and validity analyses to inform R&D and commercialization strategies.
Key Takeaways
- Scope is driven by claims: Precise claim language determines the protected invention, necessitating close review before strategic decisions.
- Broad vs. narrow claims: Broader claims afford more extensive protection but face higher invalidation risks; narrower claims offer specific protection but may be easier to design around.
- Patent landscape is competitive: Multiple filings and potential overlapping rights require vigilant landscape monitoring.
- Legal status is critical: Ensuring the patent’s validity and enforcement capacity is essential for competitive advantage.
- Ongoing innovation is vital: Patents in this space rapidly face prior art challenges; continuous R&D is needed to maintain a pipeline of protectable inventions.
FAQs
Q1: What are the typical claim types in pharmaceutical patents like JP2011173933?
A: They generally include compound claims, formulation claims, method claims (manufacturing or use), and sometimes administration or delivery system claims.
Q2: How does claim breadth affect patent enforceability?
A: Broader claims provide extensive protection but are more vulnerable to validity challenges; narrower claims are more defensible but offer limited scope.
Q3: Can similar patents block entry into the market?
A: Yes, patents like JP2011173933 can restrict generic entry, especially if claims are broad and valid, highlighting the importance of validity and landscape analysis.
Q4: What factors influence the patent’s validity in Japan?
A: Novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability are key; prior art searches during prosecution help establish validity.
Q5: How should a company approach patent landscape analysis for this patent?
A: Conduct comprehensive searches for related Japanese and international filings, review legal statuses, assess overlaps, and identify potential licensing or workaround opportunities.
References
- Japan Patent Office, Patent Database.
- Patent JP2011173933 Public Information.
- World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Patent Landscape Reports.
- Patent Law of Japan, Regulations and Guidelines.
