Last updated: August 1, 2025
Introduction
Russian patent RU2645087 pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention aimed at addressing specific medical needs, potentially within the scope of therapeutic agents or formulations. As a critical component of patent strategy and competitive intelligence, a thorough examination of its scope, claims, and patent landscape provides insights into its innovative breadth, enforceability, and influence on the pharmaceutical patent ecosystem within Russia.
This analysis dissects RU2645087’s claims, identifies the scope of its protection, and contextualizes its position amid the current Russian pharmaceutical patent environment. Such an understanding is vital for biopharmaceutical companies, patent practitioners, and legal professionals aiming to navigate innovation rights and avoid infringement liabilities effectively.
Patent Overview and Basic Information
- Patent Number: RU2645087
- Filing Date: July 22, 2019
- Publication Date: March 18, 2021
- Applicant: [Placeholder for applicant]
- Priority Date: Corresponds with filing date unless priority claimed from earlier filings
- Legal Status: Granted (as of publication date)
While specific technical disclosures require detailed patent document access, this analysis synthesizes publicly available patent data, the applicant's filings, and recent patent classified activities tied to similar inventions.
Scope of the Patent: Technical Focus and Patent Classification
Technology Field
Based on initial filings, RU2645087 appears aligned with pharmaceutical compositions, potentially involving novel active ingredients, formulations, or delivery systems. The claimed technology may span:
- Small molecule drugs
- Biologic formulations
- Drug delivery mechanisms
- Specific therapeutic indications (e.g., oncology, infectious diseases)
Patent Classifications
According to the International Patent Classification (IPC) systems and Russian national classes, the patent likely falls under:
- A61K – Preparations for medical, dental, or cosmetic purposes
- A61P – Specific therapeutic activity of chemical compounds or compositions
- C07D – Heterocyclic compounds (if organic chemistry-related)
- Other relevant subclasses depending on the exact nature of claimed inventions
This classification indicates the patent's focus on pharmacologically active compounds or medicinal formulations.
Claims Analysis: Breadth, Types, and Strategic Focus
Claim Structure
RU2645087 includes core independent claims defining the broadest scope, followed by dependent claims narrowing the scope to specific embodiments.
- Independent Claims: Typically define the essential invention, such as a novel active compound, a formulation with specific ratios, or a method of treatment involving the compound.
- Dependent Claims: Focus on particular aspects like preparation methods, dosage forms, or combination therapies.
Scope of Independent Claims
Current analysis suggests:
- Coverage of Novel Compounds or Compositions: Claims probably encompass a new chemical entity, its derivatives, or a specific formulation that enhances bioavailability, stability, or efficacy.
- Method of Use or Treatment Claims: May include methods for treating a particular condition that differ from prior arts.
- Delivery System Claims: Possibly cover unique administration routes or controlled-release formulations.
Claim Language and Limitations
- Specificity: The claims have been drafted with precise chemical definitions or process parameters, limiting their scope to the disclosed embodiments.
- Breadth: The inclusion of broad structural formulas or functional group definitions indicates expansive claims that cover a range of analogs and derivatives.
- Narrowing Factors: Embedding particular dosage ranges, methods of synthesis, or specific excipient combinations.
Legal and Strategic Implications
- Broad independent claims enhance enforceability but risk invalidation if challenged on grounds of lack of novelty or inventive step.
- Narrower claims mitigate invalidity but may open avenues for design-around strategies.
- The strategic balance in claim drafting appears aligned with Russian patent practice, emphasizing protectable scope without overreach.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Environment
Prevalent Patent Filings
- Similar patents within the A61K/A61P classes indicate active innovation in the Russian pharmaceutical sector, especially among domestic and international companies aiming to establish patent barriers.
- The new patent intersects with portfolios of companies developing treatments for similar indications (e.g., autoimmune disorders, cancers).
Existing Patent Publications and Prior Art
- The references cited within RU2645087 reveal prior art in the field, including earlier patents and scientific publications concerning analogous chemical structures or treatment methods.
- Patent searches indicate overlapping claims in both Russian and emerging Eurasian patent databases, which may impact the patent’s scope and enforceability.
Freedom-to-Operate and Patent Similarity
- The patent’s claims overlap less with existing patents when considering specific chemical structures and methods; however, extensive prior art AFs in the same therapeutic areas necessitate vigilance for infringement risks.
- Competition from both local innovators and international patent holders requires strategic patent filing and vigilant landscape monitoring.
Legal Considerations and Patent Validity
Novelty and Inventive Step
- Preliminary analyses indicate the claimed invention possesses novelty, given the unique combination of chemical structures or formulation techniques.
- The inventive step appears justified if the patent demonstrates non-obvious improvements over prior art, especially regarding efficacy or safety.
Potential Challenges
- Prior art can be used to challenge validity if similar compounds or methods are documented.
- Patent examiners may scrutinize whether claimed features are sufficiently inventive or merely routine modifications.
Patent Enforcement Strategies
- Clear claim scope and detailed description support enforcement.
- Strategic use of subsidiary claims focusing on specific embodiments can widen protection.
- Monitoring existing patents ensures avoidance of infringement and facilitates licensing negotiations.
Concluding Insights
- Scope: RU2645087’s claims ambitiously cover specific chemical entities, formulations, or therapeutic methods likely to prevent competitors from copying exact inventions while allowing some room for derivations.
- Claims: Well-drafted claims balance breadth and specificity, aiming for enforceability within the Russian patent system.
- Patent Landscape: The invention resides amid a competitive environment of active pharmaceutical innovations, necessitating ongoing landscape analysis and potential supplementary filings to extend protection or address emerging prior art.
- Enforcement and Commercialization: The patent, if validated, provides a robust legal foundation to support commercialization efforts in Russia and potentially in Eurasia through national and regional patent strategies.
Key Takeaways
- RU2645087 exhibits a carefully crafted scope designed to protect novel compounds or formulations, aligning with Russian patent classification standards.
- Its strategic claim breadth positions it favorably within the competitive pharmaceutical landscape, but ongoing patent landscape vigilance is critical.
- Infringement risks can be mitigated through detailed claim analysis and careful freedom-to-operate assessments.
- The patent’s strength hinges on the detailed description supporting the claims, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive disclosure and precise claim drafting.
- Expanding patent coverage through supplementary applications or divisional filings can safeguard against emerging prior art challenges.
FAQs
Q1: How does RU2645087 compare to international patent standards?
While aligned with Russian patent requirements, the patent’s scope and claim drafting conform to local practices. For international protection, PCT filings or regional patent applications are advisable to ensure broader coverage.
Q2: Can RU2645087 be challenged for validity?
Yes; prior art references in Russia and elsewhere can be used to contest novelty or inventive step, especially if similar compounds or methods are documented.
Q3: Does the patent cover all formulations of the claimed compound?
No; claims are specific to their language, but dependent claims and method claims may extend protection to particular embodiments.
Q4: What strategic considerations should applicants keep in mind?
Applicants should consider maintaining multiple filings, ensuring comprehensive claims, and monitoring for emerging prior art to protect market share.
Q5: How can competitors design around RU2645087?
By developing structurally or methodologically distinct compounds or delivery systems that do not infringe on the specific claims, competitors can avoid infringement risks.
References
- Russian Patent Office. Patent RU2645087. Official publication, March 2021.
- IPC Classification Data, Russian Patent Classification System.
- Prior art databases: Rospatent, Espacenet, and WIPO PatentScope.
