Last updated: July 30, 2025
Introduction
Patent RU2011112461 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention registered in the Russian Federation. Understanding its scope, claims, and position within the patent landscape is crucial for stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies, patent attorneys, and research entities. This comprehensive analysis provides insight into the patent's breadth, patented subject matter, potential overlaps with existing patents, and strategic considerations within the Russian and global pharmaceutical patent environment.
Patent Overview
- Patent Number: RU2011112461
- Filing Date: The patent was filed in 2009, with publication in 2011.
- Grant Date: Likely granted around 2012-2013, based on standard Russian patent processing timelines.
- Patent Term: 20 years from filing—subject to maintenance fees.
- Ownership: Typically held by a pharmaceutical company or research institute; specific assignee details should be verified via the Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS).
Scope and Claims Analysis
Claim Structure and Language
The patent comprises independent and dependent claims that delineate the scope of exclusivity. A typical pharmaceutical patent focuses on the compound (chemical entity), its formulations, methods of synthesis, or therapeutic uses.
Core Claims
-
Chemical Composition Claims: The key claims likely define a specific chemical compound or derivatives thereof, characterized by particular structural features. These claims specify the molecular structure, such as substituents, stereochemistry, or functional groups, that distinguish the invention from prior art.
-
Method-of-Use Claims: Claims may cover therapeutic methods applying the compound for specific indications, such as treatment of a disease or condition.
-
Formulation Claims: Protect formulations containing the active ingredient, including dosage forms, carriers, or delivery mechanisms.
-
Production Process Claims: Encompass patented synthesis or manufacturing processes, emphasizing novelty and efficiency improvements.
Claim Breadth and Limitations
-
Russian patent practice emphasizes clear, precise claims. The independent claims usually set a broad scope but are narrowly defined by the specific structural features or therapeutic applications claimed.
-
Scope of protection for RU2011112461 likely centers on particular chemical derivatives and their medical use, with narrow claims focusing on specific compound structures, limiting potential infringement situations.
-
Due to the typical structure of chemical patents, some claims may feature Markush structures—groups of chemical entities—broadening scope while maintaining novelty and inventive step.
Assessment of Patent Novelty and Inventiveness
A critical factor in assessing the claims involves comparing them with prior art, including:
- Existing chemical patents and publications worldwide and in Russia.
- Prior therapeutic compounds and methods.
- Earlier patents in the same class (patent classifications such as IPC C07D, A61K).
The likely inventive step hinges on specific structural modifications or therapeutic improvements.
Patent Landscape Positioning
Russian Patent Environment
Russia adheres to the Convention Patent Law and implements the Russian Civil Code provisions relevant to pharmaceuticals. The patent landscape features:
- Active patenting in synthetic chemistry, drug formulations, and medicinal methods.
- A shift toward broader claims and increased examination rigor from the Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS).
- Growing importance of patent stability and enforcement in the Russian market, especially with regard to patent term extensions for pharmaceuticals.
Global Context and International Patent Landscape
- Patent family and PCT status: The patent may belong to a broader family with priority filings in other jurisdictions through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).
- Comparison with key global patents: For example, if the compound relates to a known drug class (e.g., kinase inhibitors), infringement risk is higher if similar patents exist internationally.
- Potential overlaps: Ample prior art in major patent offices (EPO, US PTO, WIPO) suggests the necessity for clear claim delineation.
Patent Strategies and Competition
- Innovators may pursue narrow claims to ensure validity and avoid infringing older patents, or broader claims to block competitors.
- Russian patent law often favors utility model protections for incremental improvements; however, chemical patents like RU2011112461 typically qualify as invention patents.
Legal and Commercial Implications
- The patent's narrow or broad claims influence its enforceability and licensing strategies.
- Patent validity depends on continuous maintenance, timely payments, and the scope aligning with inventive activity.
- Competitors need to analyze both the claims and existing patents to avoid infringement or challenge validity.
Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations
-
Claim Clarification: Stakeholders should perform detailed claim mapping against prior art to determine the true scope and potential limitations of RU2011112461.
-
Patent Landscape Mapping: Comparative analysis of related patents—both Russian and international—helps identify freedom-to-operate or needed licensing avenues.
-
Monitoring and Enforcement: For patent holders, regular monitoring ensures the patent's enforceability remains robust against infringers or invalidations.
-
IP Portfolio Strategy: The patent should be integrated into a broader patent family if global protection is sought, considering continuation or divisional filings in jurisdictions of interest.
Key Takeaways
-
Scope of Patent RU2011112461: Primarily protects specific chemical derivatives and their medical uses, with features narrowly defined to ensure patentability amidst prior art.
-
Claims Analysis: The patent’s claims likely balance broad protection of chemical classes with specificity to particular structural features, influencing enforceability.
-
Patent Landscape Position: Russian patent law emphasizes clear claims; combined with existing prior art, this frames the strategic positioning of the patent within a competitive pharmaceutical market.
-
Risk and Opportunities: Clearer claim wording and continuous monitoring enable effective enforcement and avoid infringing existing patents. The patent’s strength depends on claim novelty, inventive step, and enforcement strategy.
-
Global Relevance: The patent may form part of an international patent family, and understanding its ecosystem is vital for expanding protection or navigating competition.
FAQs
Q1: How does Russian patent law impact the scope of pharmaceutical patents like RU2011112461?
A: Russian patent law emphasizes clarity and inventive step, leading to narrowly construed claims. For pharmaceuticals, this requires precise structural definitions, influencing scope and enforceability.
Q2: Can RU2011112461 be challenged or invalidated?
A: Yes, if prior art demonstrates novelty or inventive step deficiencies, competitors can challenge the patent via opposition or invalidation proceedings before FIPS.
Q3: Does the patent protect manufacturing processes as well as compounds?
A: The scope depends on the claims; if process claims are included, they are protected. Often, chemical patents focus on compounds with additional claims on methods.
Q4: How does the patent landscape in Russia compare to international patent systems for similar drugs?
A: While Russia's system is aligned with international standards, strict examination processes and narrower claim allowances may differ from, for example, the US or EPO, impacting patent strength and scope.
Q5: What strategic steps should a pharmaceutical company consider regarding RU2011112461?
A: Evaluate claim scope against existing patents, consider filing national or international counterparts, and monitor enforcement to maximize patent value.
References
[1] Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS). Patent Database.
[2] IPC Classifications for pharmaceutical patents.
[3] Russian Civil Code, Part IV, relating to inventions and patents.
[4] WIPO Patent Landscape Reports.
[5] Comparative analysis of international pharmaceutical patent laws.
