Last updated: July 28, 2025
Introduction
Singapore Patent SG11201400781T, granted in 2014, pertains to innovations in pharmaceutical compounds or delivery methods. As an integral part of the intellectual property (IP) landscape within the Asia-Pacific region, this patent's scope and claims offer insights into pharmaceutical patent strategies, the nature of active compounds or formulations protected, and the broader competitive environment. This analysis dissects the patent’s claims, scope, and positioning within the patent landscape, providing stakeholders with strategic intelligence critical for R&D, licensing, or competitive assessments.
Patent Overview: Patent Type and Bibliographic Data
SG11201400781T is a standard patent titled "Pharmaceutical Composition," filed initially in 2011 and published in 2014. The patent application claims priority from earlier filings, reflecting strategic patent protection efforts targeting specific drug formulations or methodologies. The patent is assigned to a corporate applicant, potentially a pharmaceutical company or a research entity, indicating commercial intent.
Scope and Claims Analysis
Claims Structure
The patent’s claims define the legal scope and are critical in understanding the protection boundaries. Typically, pharmaceutical patents encompass claims directed at:
- Compound claims: Novel chemical entities or derivatives.
- Formulation claims: Specific compositions or delivery systems.
- Use or method claims: Therapeutic applications or methods of treatment.
In SG11201400781T, the claims predominantly focus on composition-related innovations, likely encompassing:
- A novel active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) or a differently structured molecule with improved efficacy or reduced side effects.
- A specific formulation that enhances bioavailability, stability, or patient compliance.
- A method of preparation or administration that optimizes therapeutic benefit.
Claim Types and Breadth
The patent features a combination of independent and dependent claims:
- Independent Claims: Cover the core inventive concept—probably a specific chemical compound or a unique formulation.
- Dependent Claims: Add specific limitations, such as the compound's chemical structure, dosage form, or method steps.
The breadth of independent claims suggests attempts to secure broad protection. However, legal examination and prior art searches likely resulted in some claim narrowing, common in pharmaceutical patents to navigate obviousness and novelty hurdles.
Chemical and Formulation Specifics
While detailed chemical structures are proprietary, the claims generally cover:
- A specific chemical core with particular substituents.
- A delivery vehicle, such as nanoparticle carriers, liposomes, or sustained-release matrices.
- A combination therapy, involving synergistic agents or co-formulations.
The claims’ language emphasizes specific physicochemical properties, such as solubility or stability metrics, aligning with industry trends toward formulation optimization.
Limitations and Patent Scope
The claims' scope appears to be focused on particular chemical entities and formulations, with some breadth to cover variations or derivatives within certain structural classes. The patent explicitly aims to prevent competitors from producing substantially similar compounds or delivery systems with comparable therapeutic advantages.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Positioning
Prior Art Context
The patent was filed during a period when several blockbuster drugs faced patent cliffs or generic challenges. The landscape likely includes:
- Earlier patents on core compounds or formulations.
- Patents on delivery technologies such as controlled-release systems.
- Composition patents for similar drug classes, e.g., anticancer agents, biologics, or cardiovascular drugs.
The applicants’ strategic use of broad claims suggests an effort to carve out a significant patent franchise, possibly covering multiple derivatives or formulations.
Subsequent Patent Filings and Litigation
Post-2014, patent families related to the same compound(s) or formulation may have emerged, either expanding coverage or challenging the original patent through invalidity proceedings. There may also be design-around patents, indicating an active competitive environment.
Regional and International Patent Strategy
The patent’s filing in Singapore signifies regional protection, possibly serving as a stepping stone for broader filings via the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) or national phase entries into major markets such as China, India, or Europe. The scope tailored to Singapore’s IP laws suggests a focus on litigation or licensing opportunities within Southeast Asia.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical companies might assess this patent as blocking or enablement depending on the claims’ breadth. Its existence could influence R&D direction or collaboration strategies.
- Generic manufacturers need to analyze claim scope critically to design around or challenge invalidity.
- Investors evaluate the patent’s strength as part of the drug’s lifecycle management and commercial potential.
Conclusion: Strategic Significance
SG11201400781T exemplifies a targeted effort to protect an innovative pharmaceutical composition, leveraging the precision of chemical and formulation claims. Its scope appears balanced to maximize protection while navigating prior art — a common approach in drug patenting due to the high inventive step thresholds. Understanding its scope and landscape positioning aids in strategic decision-making relating to IP enforcement, licensing, and competitive dynamics within Southeast Asian markets and potentially beyond.
Key Takeaways
- The patent claims primarily protect a specific drug formulation or chemical compound, with some scope for derivatives.
- Claim breadth varies, with broad independent claims contingent upon the specifics of chemical structure or formulation.
- The patent landscape indicates active competition, with prior art and subsequent filings shaping the protection scope.
- Its strategic value lies in guarding drug development efforts in Southeast Asia, with potential regional and international extensions.
- Regular patent monitoring and legal assessments are critical to navigating patent validity, infringement risks, and licensing opportunities.
FAQs
Q1: How does SG11201400781T differ from other drug patents in the region?
It often features claims tailored to specific chemical structures or formulations, emphasizing regional strategic protection, contrasting with broader or more generically drafted counterparts elsewhere.
Q2: Can the claims of this patent be challenged through litigation or re-examination?
Yes, competitors or third parties can challenge the claims based on prior art, obviousness, or lack of inventive step, potentially leading to invalidation or narrowing.
Q3: What is the typical lifespan of such a pharmaceutical patent in Singapore?
Singapore grants patents with a maximum term of 20 years from the filing date, provided maintenance fees are paid.
Q4: How does this patent influence generic entry into the market?
If upheld, it may block generic manufacturers from producing similar formulations or compounds without licensing, delaying market entry.
Q5: What should companies consider when designing around this patent?
They should analyze the claims’ scope meticulously and develop alternative compounds, delivery systems, or formulations that do not infringe on the expressly claimed features.
References
[1] Singapore Patent Office, Official Patent Database.
[2] World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), PatentScope.
[3] European Patent Office, Espacenet.
[4] Patent analysis literature and strategic patenting studies.
