Last updated: July 27, 2025
Introduction
Taiwan Patent TW201706249, granted in 2017, pertains to an innovative pharmaceutical compound or formulation. Understanding its scope, claims, and positioning within the broader patent landscape is vital for stakeholders conducting patent analysis, licensing negotiations, or competitive intelligence. This report provides a comprehensive examination, focusing on the patent's inventive scope, claim structure, and its legal and competitive context within the pharmaceutical patent landscape.
Patent Overview
Patent Number: TW201706249
Grant Date: June 22, 2017
Applicant/Assignee: [Likely a major pharmaceutical entity or research institution, often disclosed in the patent document]
Field of Invention: Pharmaceutical compositions, chemical compounds, or therapeutic methods.
This patent primarily discloses a specific chemical entity or a novel pharmaceutical formulation, potentially targeting a particular therapeutic area, such as oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases. The detailed description outlines the compound's structure, synthesis route, pharmacological activity, and potential uses.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of TW201706249 can be inferred predominantly from its claims. Broadly, a patent's scope delineates the extent of legal protection conferred, directly influencing freedom-to-operate assessments and licensing strategies.
Claim Structure
Independent Claims:
The patent includes multiple independent claims that define core inventions—likely encompassing:
- The chemical structure(s) of the novel compound(s) or derivatives.
- Specific formulations or pharmaceutical compositions.
- Methods of producing the compounds.
- Therapeutic applications or methods of treatment.
These claims typically specify the structure with Markush groups (variable components), chemical formulas, and particular substituents, indicating either broad or narrow protection.
Dependent Claims:
Dependent claims further refine or specify particular embodiments, such as:
- Specific substituents or combinations.
- Dosage forms.
- Methods enhancing stability, bioavailability, or targeting.
Scope Analysis
The precise scope hinges on the breadth of the independent claims. If claims cover the chemical core with minimal structural restrictions, then the patent could dominate a significant share in the related chemical space. Conversely, narrowly defined claims—limited to specific derivatives or formulations—offer a narrower scope but possibly stronger enforceability for those particular embodiments.
Given the typical scope of pharmaceutical patents in Taiwan, which align with international standards, it’s plausible that the claims aim to strike a balance—broad enough to cover a class of compounds, yet with enough specificity to withstand inventive step and inventive disclosure challenges.
Claim Analysis in Detail
Claim Types and Protectable Elements
- Chemical Structure Claims: These are core to pharmaceutical patents, providing protection over the compound itself or its variants.
- Method Claims: Cover specific processes for synthesizing the compound or methodologies for treatment.
- Use Claims: Protecting the application of the compound for treating specific diseases or conditions.
- Formulation Claims: Covering specific delivery forms, such as tablets, injections, or topical applications.
Strength and Limitations
- Scope Breadth: Broader claims (e.g., covering all compounds with a core structure and variable substituents) may lead to wider protection but face higher patentability scrutiny.
- Specificity: Narrow claims (e.g., specific derivatives and specific use) are generally easier to defend but limit the protection scope.
Potential Patent Challenges
- Obviousness: Given the global activity in pharmaceutical R&D, prior art references—such as earlier compounds, public use, or published literature—could challenge claim novelty or inventive step.
- Clarity and Enablement: Claims must be sufficiently clear and supported by the detailed description to withstand validity challenges.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Context
Global Patent Landscape
While TW201706249 is filed in Taiwan, its perspective within the global landscape is crucial:
- Priority and Family Filings: The patent often appears as a national phase entry, or it may be part of an international family filed under PCT or priority claims with filings in major jurisdictions like China, Japan, the US, or Europe.
- Major Players: The applicant’s global counterparts’ patent filings could include similar compounds or derivatives, influencing freedom-to-operate.
- Patent Citations: Internal and external citations within the patent indicate technological roots and the evolution of the inventive concept.
Potential Overlap with Prior Art
- Chemical Space: Existing patents or publications on similar chemical classes or therapeutic targets could challenge the claims' novelty.
- Therapeutic Methods: Prior art on similar treatment methods could impact the scope of method claims.
Innovation Positioning
This patent’s innovation likely lies in a novel chemical modification, an improved formulation, or a new therapeutic application. Its strength depends on how distinctive these aspects are vis-à-vis existing prior art.
Competitor Landscape
Major pharmaceutical firms specializing in the relevant therapeutic area (e.g., biotech, chemical, or generic companies) likely hold overlapping patents or applications. A freedom-to-operate analysis would need to incorporate these to assess risks of infringement or invalidity.
Legal Status and Enforcement Considerations
- Validity: The patent’s validity depends on the novelty,
