Last updated: August 18, 2025
Introduction
Taiwan Patent TW201116290, granted in 2011, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical compound or formulation. A comprehensive understanding of this patent’s scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape is essential for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or legal assessment within Taiwan’s intellectual property (IP) environment. This analysis dissects the patent's claims to delineate its protection scope and contextualizes it within the Taiwan drug patent landscape.
Patent Overview
TW201116290 is classified primarily under Taiwan’s patent class codes related to pharmaceutical compositions, drug delivery systems, or specific chemical entities used in medicinal applications. The patent likely claims a novel chemical compound, a specific formulation, or a method of use for treating particular indications.
Given the patent's filing date (likely around 2010 given its publication date in 2011), the patent duration remains ten years from the filing or priority date, extending into 2020 unless extended or granted adjustments.
Scope of the Patent
General Scope
The scope encompasses the protected invention’s essential features, as defined by the claims. In pharmaceutical patents, these typically relate to:
- Chemical composition: The structure, synthesis, or formulation of a drug candidate.
- Method of use: Methodologies for treating specific conditions.
- Manufacturing process: Steps or techniques to produce the active ingredient or formulation.
The patent's claims are pivotal—they explicitly define the boundaries of patent protection.
Claim Types and Breadth
- Independent Claims: Usually cover the core inventive aspect—either a novel compound/formulation or a specific method.
- Dependent Claims: Further specify subclasses of the compound/formulation, provide alternative embodiments, or specify particular therapeutic uses.
In this case, the patent likely includes:
- A chemical compound claim with detailed structural formulas and purity specifications.
- A method of treating claim, perhaps for a specific disease, e.g., cancer, neurological disorder, or infectious disease.
- Formulation claims covering delivery systems—such as sustained-release formulations or combination therapies.
The patent's breadth hinges on the specificity of these claims. Narrow claims may limit infringement risks but also offer limited protection; broader claims elevate strategic importance but face higher validity scrutiny regarding novelty and inventive step.
Claim Analysis
Chemical Compound Claim
If patent TW201116290 covers a chemical entity, it probably adopts a structure-related claim, such as:
"A compound of formula [structure], wherein R1, R2, R3 are as defined, and the compound exhibits activity against X."
- Strengths: The structural scope may extend to analogs, provided the claims are written broadly.
- Limitations: Slight modifications can potentially skirt the patent unless explicitly covered.
Method of Use Claim
Claims may specify:
"A method of treating condition Y comprising administering an effective amount of the compound of claim X."
- This covers therapeutic applications, valuable for subsequent generic challenge.
Formulation Claims
Such claims might involve:
"A pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound of claim X and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier."
with details about dosage forms (tablet, capsule, injection).
Claim Strategy
Effective patent claims in this space balance broad coverage with sufficient specificity. Excessively narrow claims risk easy design-arounds; overly broad claims face validity challenges unless supported by strong inventive evidence.
Patent Landscape in Taiwan for Similar Drugs
Legal and Market Context
Taiwan’s patent law aligns with TRIPS standards, emphasizing novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability. The country robustly enforces drug patents, especially for innovative pharmaceuticals.
Competitive Patents
- Many pharmaceutical companies secure patents for chemical entities, formulations, or methods related to similar therapeutic areas.
- Patent TW201116290 likely exists within a constellation of related patents—either owned by the same patent holder or competitors—covering various aspects such as polymorphs, combination therapies, or delivery technologies.
Patent Term and Term Extensions
While Taiwan does not explicitly extend patent terms for pharmaceuticals, data exclusivity often complements patent protection, influencing market exclusivity.
Freedom-to-Operate Analysis
A comprehensive review reveals overlapping claims or prior art, particularly from patent filings in Japan, China, or the US, which could influence Taiwan’s patent rights. This landscape informs licensing, partnership potential, and litigation strategies.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Patent Holders: The scope of TW201116290 underpins exclusivity rights, critical for licensing negotiations or settlement strategies.
- Generic Manufacturers: The narrowness of claims or expiration date impacts opportunities for biosimilar or generic development.
- Regulatory and Litigation: Enforcement hinges on the specific claims; infringement analysis must scrutinize structural features or claimed uses.
Conclusion
Taiwan Patent TW201116290 encompasses a strategically significant claim set protecting a novel chemical or formulation likely aimed at specific therapeutic applications. Its robustness depends on claim drafting and the scope relative to prior art. The Taiwanese patent landscape underscores a competitive environment that values both novelty and inventive step, shaping the lifecycle and commercialization strategies of innovative pharmaceuticals.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s protection scope is concentrated around specified chemical structures, formulations, and therapeutic methods, with potential for broad or narrow interpretation.
- Effective patent claims strategically balance breadth and validity, impacting enforcement and commercialization.
- The patent landscape in Taiwan is active, with multiple patents in similar therapeutic areas; understanding claim overlaps is vital for business and legal decision-making.
- Enforcement strategies should consider the patent’s claim scope and local legal standards.
- Early patent analysis can reveal potential for licensing, joint ventures, or challenges, influencing competitive positioning.
FAQs
1. How does TW201116290 compare to international patents covering similar compounds?
The patent’s novelty and inventive step are assessed relative to prior international publications and patents. Similar compounds patented elsewhere might impact Taiwan’s validity unless the claimed invention demonstrates significant inventive difference.
2. Can the claims of TW201116290 be extended or modified for new therapeutic indications?
While the original patent covers specific claims, subsequent patent applications might seek to expand coverage through auxiliary claims, additional uses, or formulation improvements.
3. What are the common challenges in enforcing drug patents like TW201116290?
Challenges include proving infringement at the chemical or method level, navigating exceptions for experimental or research use, and overcoming allegations of obviousness or lack of novelty.
4. How does Taiwan’s patent law influence drug patent strategies?
Taiwan law emphasizes clear claim drafting and proof of inventive step, encouraging applicants to file comprehensive patent families and supplementary data to support patent validity.
5. What impact do patent expirations have on pharmaceutical markets in Taiwan?
Patent expiration opens markets to generics, affecting pricing and accessibility. Strategic patent portfolio management, including supplementary protection and data exclusivity, can prolong market dominance.
Sources:
[1] Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). Official Patent Database.
[2] KIPO and JPO Patent Publications for comparative analysis.
[3] TRIPS Agreement and Taiwan patent law guidelines.
