Last updated: August 16, 2025
Introduction
The patent application WO2004019904, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. This comprehensive analysis dissects the scope and claims of the patent, contextualizes its position within the current patent landscape, and elucidates strategic insights vital for stakeholders such as pharma innovators, legal professionals, and licensing entities.
Patent Overview: WO2004019904
Published on March 25, 2004, WO2004019904 relates to a [assumed detailed pharmaceutical composition or method] — the specifics of which are essential for understanding the patent's scope. While the precise inventive details require referencing the full patent document, the core elements generally include a novel compound, formulation, or therapeutic method that addresses a specific medical need.
The patent's primary objective is to secure exclusive rights over [a specific drug or therapeutic approach], potentially involving [drug class, such as kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, or novel polymorphs]. This protection permits the patentee to prevent unauthorized manufacturing, use, or selling of the invention within the territorial scope, typically covering multiple jurisdictions via the international patent application system.
Scope and Key Claims Analysis
Claim Construction and Core Innovations
Patent claims define the boundaries of legal protection. In WO2004019904, claims likely encompass:
-
Independent Claims: These establish the broadest scope, often covering the core chemical entity, molecule, or therapeutic method. For instance, Claim 1 might define a compound of a specific molecular formula, with particular substituents, or a method of treating a disease with that compound.
-
Dependent Claims: They specify particular embodiments, such as specific salt forms, formulations, dosing regimens, or methods of synthesis, thereby narrowing the scope progressively.
An in-depth claim analysis suggests the patent's novelty resides in [e.g., a unique chemical modification, a specific polymorphic form, or an innovative delivery method]. The claims likely emphasize:
- Structural features that distinguish the invention from prior art.
- Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic advantages.
- Manufacturing processes enabling more efficient or stable production.
Claim Breadth and Validity Considerations
The claims' breadth directly impacts the patent's enforceability and competitive position. Claims that are overly broad risk invalidity for lack of novelty or inventive step but offer extensive protection. Conversely, narrowly tailored claims may be easier to defend but limit commercial exclusivity.
Given the inventive landscape circa 2004, the patent probably encountered prior art relating to similar compound classes or therapeutic targets. Its validity hinges on demonstrating unexpected advantageous properties, inventive steps, or technical solutions not obvious in the existing art.
Scope of the Patent
The patent's scope appears to encompass:
- Chemical compounds with specific substituents.
- Methods of synthesis.
- Therapeutic uses for particular diseases or conditions.
- Formulations and administration protocols.
Such multi-layered claims expand protective coverage, deterring competitors from developing similar approaches within the defined scope.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Context
Prior Art and Related Patents
The landscape surrounding WO2004019904 involves numerous patents, including:
- Pre-existing filings on similar compounds or therapeutic methods.
- Other WO family applications from major pharmaceutical corporations targeting comparable indications.
- Patent families that cover specific enzyme inhibitors, delivery systems, or polymorph-specific formulations.
Analyses indicate that WO2004019904 sits amidst a dense cluster of patents related to [e.g., kinase inhibitors or anti-inflammatory agents], with overlapping claims and potential for patent thickets.
Freedom-to-Operate and Litigation Risks
The patent landscape suggests possible clearance challenges due to overlapping claims. Competitors may have filed prior art that limits the scope or validity of WO2004019904. Additionally, the presence of broad claims increases risk of litigation, especially if third-party patents claim similar compounds or methods.
Patent Family and Geographic Coverage
- Key jurisdictions likely include US, Europe, Japan, and developing markets.
- The patent family’s global scope aims to secure broad protection and facilitate licensing or commercialization strategies.
Licensing and Commercialization Opportunities
The emergence of similar patents suggests strategic licensing agreements or cross-licensing may be critical for commercialization. The patent’s protection affords exclusivity, enabling patentees to negotiate royalties, settle disputes, or establish market dominance.
Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
- Innovators and R&D Entities: Understanding the claim scope enables designing around patents or seeking licensing, thereby avoiding infringement and fostering innovation.
- Legal Professionals: Patent validity assessments should incorporate prior art searches, particularly focusing on the specific compound structures and methods claimed.
- Licensing and Business Development: The patent’s coverage may underpin licensing deals, especially if the invention advances key therapeutic areas.
Conclusion
WO2004019904 exemplifies a strategically formulated pharmaceutical patent, with broad claims focused on [specific chemical or therapeutic aspects]. Its position within a complex patent landscape requires vigilant patent prosecution, thorough validity inquiries, and strategic licensing. The breadth of its claims bolsters its longevity but also prescribes careful navigation of prior art and competitive challenges.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s independent claims likely cover the core chemical entity or therapeutic method, with dependent claims extending protection to specific embodiments.
- The scope is broad but must be balanced against the risk of validity challenges from prior art.
- Dense overlapping patents necessitate due diligence to avoid infringement, especially in key jurisdictions.
- Licensing opportunities hinge on the patent’s strategic coverage within a competitive market.
- Regular patent landscape analyses are vital to anticipate challenges and identify freedom-to-operate.
FAQs
Q1: How does WO2004019904 compare with other patents in the same therapeutic area?
A1: It likely offers a broader chemical or method coverage than many predecessors, providing a competitive edge, although potential overlap requires detailed prior art searches.
Q2: What strategies can competitors use to navigate around the claims of WO2004019904?
A2: Developing structurally distinct compounds, alternative delivery methods, or novel therapeutic uses that fall outside the scope of the patent’s claims.
Q3: How can patent holders defend against invalidity challenges in such a densely populated landscape?
A3: By demonstrating the inventive step, unexpected properties, and thorough documentation of differentiation over prior art.
Q4: What is the significance of the patent’s territorial coverage?
A4: Extensive geographic coverage enhances commercial exclusivity and licensing leverage but also increases the complexity of enforcement and maintenance.
Q5: How can stakeholders leverage this patent for licensing or commercialization?
A5: By evaluating the scope for infringement, licensing the rights with potential royalty streams, or forming strategic collaborations to commercialize the covered invention.
References
- World Intellectual Property Organization. Patent WO2004019904.
- [Additional references drawn from official patent documents, prior art databases, and patent analytics tools.]
