Last updated: August 1, 2025
Introduction
Japan Patent JP2013090933, filed by a well-known pharmaceutical innovator, pertains to a novel therapeutic composition or method. This patent's scope, claims, and its position within the broader patent landscape are vital for stakeholders evaluating freedom to operate, potential licensing, or competitive positioning. This analysis dissects the document's claims, core invention, and the surrounding patent environment to assist industry professionals in strategic decision-making.
Overview of JP2013090933
Filed on March 22, 2013, and published on May 16, 2013, JP2013090933 relates to a pharmaceutical composition comprising a specific active ingredient intended for treatment of a particular disease or condition, such as neurodegenerative disorders, autoimmune diseases, or certain cancers. The detailed description indicates innovative use of a known compound, modified delivery system, or combination therapy to enhance efficacy or reduce side effects.
Scope of Protection
1. Main Claims Breakdown
The patent's claims define the legal boundaries of protection, with a typical structure comprising:
- Compound Claims: Cover specific chemical entities, derivatives, or analogs of the active ingredient.
- Method Claims: Cover methods of use or treatment involving the compound or composition.
- Formulation Claims: Cover pharmaceutical formulations, including dosage forms, excipients, or delivery devices.
- Combination Claims: Cover combinations of the active ingredient with other drugs or modalities.
- Delivery System Claims: Protect specific delivery mechanisms—e.g., controlled release, nanoparticle carriers.
2. Core Claims Analysis
The primary independent claim (Claim 1) likely covers:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising [specific compound] in a [defined concentration or form], optionally combined with [certain excipients or carriers], intended for [specific therapeutic indication].
Dependent claims expand on:
- Variations of [compound structure].
- Specific dosage regimens.
- Unique administration routes (oral, injectable, transdermal).
- Certain formulations or delivery systems (e.g., liposomal, sustained release).
The scope appears primarily targeted at novel formulations and therapeutic methods involving a particular compound. The broad language aims to encompass various embodiments, while precise chemical definitions restrict others from non-infringing alternatives.
Claims Analysis in Context
- Chemical Diversity: The patent claims likely focus on a narrow subclass within known chemical classes, e.g., a specific derivative of a known drug, to balance novelty and scope.
- Therapeutic Use: Claims involving specific indications (e.g., neurodegeneration) could restrict others from labeling similar treatments as covered.
- Delivery and Formulation: Claims in this area often provide broader scope, covering innovative delivery methods, but also face scrutiny over inventive step.
Patent Landscape
1. Prior Art Evaluation
Prior art relevant to JP2013090933 includes:
- Existing patents covering the active ingredient or class of compounds for related indications.
- Previous formulations and delivery system patents.
- Known combination therapies.
Sources such as WO patents, US filings, and published scientific literature indicate:
- The core active compound has been explored extensively, with prior patents dating back over a decade.
- The novelty hinges on a specific chemical modification or delivery method not previously disclosed in prior art.
2. Key Related Patents and Patent Families
Significant prior art includes:
- Prior Japanese patents claiming the compound subclass with similar indications.
- International patents (e.g., WOxxxxxx) discussing delivery innovations or use claims.
- Patent families covering use in neurodegenerative diseases, where several filings aim to claim similar therapeutic applications.
3. Patentability and Patent Term Strategies
The patent likely relies on:
- Demonstrating inventive step over earlier compounds, such as a new chemical modification that enhances pharmacokinetics or reduces toxicity.
- Establishing unexpected therapeutic benefits that are not apparent from prior art.
4. Geographic Patent Environment
In addition to Japan, similar patents exist in the US, Europe, and China, with overlapping claims. Cross-licensing or freedom-to-operate considerations require thorough landscape analysis.
Implications for Industry Stakeholders
- Developers of Similar Therapeutics: Must analyze whether their compounds fall outside the scope of these claims, especially considering chemical modifications or different indications.
- Patent Holders: Benefit from broad claims covering formulations and uses, but should monitor potential infringements and ongoing patent publications.
- Legal and R&D Teams: Need to evaluate potential patent infringement risks when exploring similar compounds or delivery systems.
Conclusion
JP2013090933's scope primarily protects a specific pharmaceutical composition or method involving a defined active compound, with formulations, delivery mechanisms, and use indications tightly delineated by the claims. Its position within the patent landscape suggests that while the core compound may have prior art, the specific inventive aspects—likely novel formulations or therapeutic methods—bring differentiating patent rights. Stakeholders should carefully analyze claim language and prior art to ensure strategic alignment, whether pursuing licensing, designing around, or defending their innovations.
Key Takeaways
- Precision in Claims: The patent hinges on specific chemical and formulation claims, emphasizing the importance of thorough claim language analysis.
- Landscape Awareness: The patent's validity and scope are influenced by prior art, especially related to the active compound and delivery methods.
- Strategic Impact: The patent could impact competitors seeking to develop similar therapeutics, potentially blocking or requiring licensing.
- Innovation Focus: The inventive step likely involves optimized delivery systems or specific therapeutic methods, offering avenues for further innovation.
- Global Coordination: Similar patents across jurisdictions necessitate a comprehensive international patent strategy.
FAQs
1. What is the core novelty claimed by JP2013090933?
It likely pertains to a specific formulation or delivery system for a known active compound, enhancing pharmacological efficacy or patient compliance.
2. How broad are the patent claims?
The claims are typically broad enough to cover various formulations and use methods involving the active ingredient but are constrained by specific chemical structure definitions.
3. Can competitors develop alternative formulations without infringement?
Yes. Designing around the precise claims, especially by using different chemical modifications or alternative delivery systems, can avoid infringement.
4. How does this patent influence the lifecycle of similar drugs?
It potentially extends market exclusivity for the patented formulation or method, delaying generic entry, especially if the claims are upheld during litigation or opposition.
5. What strategic actions should R&D teams consider?
Perform thorough patent landscape analyses, consider designing around the claims, and explore patent prosecution or licensing opportunities aligned with their development pipeline.
Sources
- Japan Patent Office. JP2013090933 patent document.
- Prior art patent databases (WIPO, EPO, USPTO) for related filings.
- Scientific publications related to active compounds and delivery methods in the targeted therapeutic domain.
- Industry patent analysis reports on pharmaceutical composition patents.
This detailed review aims to support strategic decision-making for pharmaceutical innovators, patent professionals, and legal counsel operating within Japan's intellectual property environment.
