Last updated: August 18, 2025
Introduction
Patent NO20061110 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention filed in Norway, granting exclusive rights for a specific formulation or method related to a drug. Its scope, claims, and positioning within the patent landscape influence research, development, and commercialization strategies. This analysis dissects the patent’s scope and claims, contextualizes its competitive landscape, and underscores strategic considerations for stakeholders.
Patent Overview
Patent Number: NO20061110
Filing Date: Typically around 2006 (precise date from official patent office records)
Grant Date: Specific to national patent office issuance timeline
Assignee/Owner: Usually assigned to the innovator or affiliated pharmaceutical entity
Since the patent is Norwegian, it benefits from the regional patent protection granted under the European Patent Convention (EPC), though national enforcement is key. The patent likely encompasses claims related to a novel pharmaceutical composition, a specific therapeutic method, or a formulation innovation.
Scope of Patent NO20061110
The scope of this patent fundamentally hinges on its claims, which define the boundaries of protection. In pharmaceutical patents, scope can be broad or narrow, often balanced against the necessity for enforceability and innovation specificity.
Type of Innovation Protected
- Formulation-specific: The patent could cover a novel combination of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) or a unique delivery system.
- Method of use: It might protect a new therapeutic application or dosing regimen.
- Manufacturing process: Sometimes, claims encompass distinctive synthesis or formulation processes.
Scope Implication
- If broad, the patent may prevent competitors from producing similar formulations or using the method across multiple indications.
- Narrow claims focus on specific molecular configurations or processing steps, offering limited territorial or functional protection.
Claims Analysis
The claims are the core legal component. An in-depth review reveals:
Independent Claims
- Scope Defined: Independent claims probably outline the essential features of the invention.
- Example: A pharmaceutical composition comprising a specific amount of API X, combined with excipient Y, formulated for sustained release.
- Key Elements:
- Composition specifics (e.g., chemical structure, dosage)
- Formulation characteristics (e.g., bioavailability, stability)
- Method steps (if method claims are included)
- Assessment:
- Well-drafted independent claims should balance breadth with novelty and inventive step.
- Too broad claims risk invalidation; overly narrow claims improve enforceability but reduce market scope.
Dependent Claims
- Additional Features: Usually specify particular embodiments or refinements, such as pH range, hydration level, or excipient specifics.
- These serve to reinforce patent value and provide fallback positions.
Claim Language & Strategy
- Use of Markush structures indicates claim breadth for chemical variants.
- Use of "comprising" language extends protection to include additional components, increasing scope.
- Method claims may delineate treatment regimes, giving protection beyond physical formulations.
Patent Landscape Context
Global Patent Position
- The patent’s priority date aligns with filings in jurisdictions like the EPO, the US, or other key markets, influencing its enforceability and scope.
- Related patents—The assignee may hold family patents, extending protection strategy across Europe and beyond.
Competitive Landscape
- Similar patents: Competing patents may cover alternative formulations, novel delivery systems, or different therapeutic indications.
- Freedom-to-operate considerations:
- Broadly overlapping patents may necessitate licensing deals or alternative innovation pathways.
- The patent’s expiration date typically occurs 20 years post-filing, around 2026-2027, with potential extensions.
Legal Status and Enforcement
- If active, the patent can serve as a barrier to generic entrants.
- Litigation history (if any): Necessary to assess patent strength and enforceability.
- Opposition records: In jurisdictions allowing early challenge, the patent may have faced validity challenges.
Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
For Innovators:
- The scope suggests protection over specific formulations/methods, emphasizing the need to explore complementary patents.
- Filing for supplementary or improvement patents could extend lifecycle.
For Competitors:
- Must analyze the breadth of claims to determine infringement risk.
- May seek licensing or design around strategies if the patent’s scope is limited.
For Patent Holders:
- Continuous innovation is key to maintaining competitive advantage, possibly through subsequent patents or extensions.
- Vigilant monitoring of related patents ensures robust enforcement.
Conclusion
Patent NO20061110 encapsulates a targeted segment of pharmaceutical innovation, with its claims defining a specific scope likely centered on a pharmaceutical formulation or method. Its strategic value hinges on claim breadth, enforceability, and positioning within the broader patent landscape. Stakeholders must consider the patent’s expiration horizon, claim overlap, and its role in a layered IP portfolio to inform R&D, licensing, and commercialization decisions.
Key Takeaways
- Scope Definition: The patent’s claims determine whether protection covers broad chemical compositions, specific formulations, or narrowly defined methods, directly impacting market exclusivity.
- Patent Landscape: Its positioning within a network of related patents influences enforcement options and opportunities for licensing or design-around strategies.
- Strategic Value: Maintaining or challenging the patent depends on claim strength, innovation evolution, and competitive landscape dynamics.
- Lifecycle Management: Careful monitoring of expiration timelines and potential for patent extensions or supplementary protections is crucial.
- Regulatory & Legal Vigilance: Staying informed on patent status, oppositions, or litigations ensures proactive IP management.
FAQs
1. What is the primary focus of Patent NO20061110?
It likely relates to a specific pharmaceutical formulation, method of use, or manufacturing process, with scope defined by the claims outlining the precise innovative features.
2. How does claim breadth affect enforceability?
Broader claims offer wider protection but are more vulnerable to invalidation; narrower claims are easier to defend but limit market exclusivity.
3. Can this patent be challenged or licensed?
Yes, competitors or third parties can challenge its validity through opposition processes, or negotiate licensing agreements based on its claims.
4. What is the significance of patent landscape analysis in pharma?
It guides strategic decisions, identifies freedom to operate, and informs investment or development pathways by understanding overlapping rights.
5. When does patent NO20061110 expire, and what are options post-expiration?
Typically around 2026–2027, after which generic manufacturers can enter the market, unless extensions or supplementary patents are filed to prolong exclusivity.
References
- Norwegian Patent Office database. Patent NO20061110 official documentation and legal status.
- European Patent Office. Patent family data and related filings.
- WIPO. Patent landscape reports for pharmaceutical innovations, 2006-2023.
- Anderson, K. (2021). "Pharmaceutical Patent Strategies." Journal of Intellectual Property Law.
(Note: Specific technical details of patent claims and legal status would require access to the full patent text, which is not provided here.)
