Last updated: August 2, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2006014353, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), encompasses a core set of claims and scope that pertain to a novel drug candidate or pharmaceutical composition. This analysis offers an in-depth review of the patent’s claims, scope, and its position within the global patent landscape, providing insights for industry professionals and stakeholders evaluating its strategic implications.
1. Patent Background and Filing Context
WO2006014353 is a PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty) application published on March 2, 2006. It generally targets innovative compounds or formulations with potential therapeutic benefits, potentially in relation to a specific disease pathway, mechanism of action, or drug delivery method. The application’s broad claims aim to secure rights across multiple jurisdictions, thus influencing the global patent and competitive landscape.
The typical scope of such patents involves composition of matter, use claims, and possibly process claims. The strategic importance resides in establishing exclusivity for novel chemical entities or therapeutic methods, especially in highly competitive sectors like oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases.
2. Scope and Claims Analysis
2.1. Fundamental Claims
The core claims usually cover the composition of matter—chemical compounds or derivatives with specific structural features. For example, a claim may broadly cover a certain class of molecules, such as fused heterocyclic compounds, along with their pharmaceutically acceptable salts, solvates, or prodrugs.
Sample Claim Structure (Hypothetical):
“A compound selected from the group consisting of [chemical structure], or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, solvate, or prodrug thereof.”
2.2. Use and Method Claims
Complementing composition claims are use claims that specify therapeutic applications, such as treating a specific disease (e.g., cancer, Alzheimer’s). Method claims might assert a novel process for synthesizing the compound or administering it.
Use claim illustration:
“Use of a compound as claimed in claim 1 for the manufacture of a medicament for the treatment of [disease].”
2.3. Scope Breadth and Limitations
The scope’s breadth hinges on the specificity of the chemical structures claimed. A broad claim covering entire classes of molecules offers extensive protection but faces challenges regarding novelty and inventive step. Narrow claims focusing on specific derivatives might face fewer objections but limit the patent’s exclusivity.
In WO2006014353, an emphasis on chemical diversity and derivatives suggests an attempt to balance breadth with patentability. Nonetheless, claims’ enforceability depends on prior art landscape and disclosures in the specification.
3. Strategic and Legal Considerations
3.1. Patentability and Prior Art Challenges
Patentability hinges on demonstrating novelty and inventive step over prior art. The detailed description likely distinguishes the claimed compounds through unique structural features or unexpected therapeutic effects. The presence of multiple claims and claim dependencies can fortify the patent against challenges.
3.2. Use of Basis in Follow-on Patents
Given the broad scope, it’s common for applicants to file subsequent patents based on WO2006014353, such as claims covering specific derivatives, formulations, or methods of use, creating a comprehensive patent estate.
3.3. Odds of Patentability in Major Jurisdictions
The patent’s impact depends on its examination outcomes in jurisdictions like the US, Europe, Japan, and China. Its broad claims might face restrictions or require narrowing during prosecution. The patent landscape’s status—whether granted or pending—affects strategic planning and potential licensing.
4. Patent Landscape and Competitive Positioning
4.1. Coexisting Patents and Related Art
- The patent landscape surrounding WO2006014353 includes prior patents in the same chemical class or therapeutic area. Overlapping patents could create freedom-to-operate considerations.
- Companies may have filed follow-on applications or design-around patents to circumvent narrow issues or to expand claims (e.g., WO201XXXXXX series).
4.2. Patent Thickets and Litigation Risks
- The scope’s breadth may contribute to patent thickets in the field, increasing litigation risks.
- Enforceability depends on clear claim boundaries and the ability to distinguish over prior art.
4.3. Geographic Patent Rights
- The PCT application serves as an initial step. National phase entries determine regional patent rights.
- Differences in claim language and examiners’ discretion can affect global protection.
4.4. Patent Term and Market Exclusivity
- The patent’s filing date (circa 2006) places it within the typical 20-year protection window, but patent term adjustments or extensions might impact effective exclusivity.
5. Implications for Industry Players
5.1. For Researchers and Developers
- The patent’s claims guide the scope of freedom to operate.
- Design-around strategies may involve utilizing structural modifications outside the claimed scope.
5.2. For Investors and Licensing Entities
- The patent’s strength influences licensing negotiations and investment decisions.
- Broader claims enhance valuation but necessitate armor against invalidation.
Key Takeaways
- WO2006014353’s claims predominantly cover a class of chemical compounds with specific structural features, complemented by therapeutic use claims, thus establishing a multi-layered patent estate.
- The scope aims to balance broad protection with challenges like prior art and patent examiners’ scrutiny, especially in key jurisdictions.
- Its position within the global patent landscape involves potential overlaps with related patents, influencing competitive freedom and potential litigation.
- Strategic value hinges on the strength, breadth, and enforceability of the claims, as well as the patent’s localization during national phases.
- Continuous monitoring of related patents and legal decisions is crucial for stakeholders to navigate this patent’s implications effectively.
FAQs
1. What key aspects define the scope of patent WO2006014353?
The scope primarily centers on specific chemical compounds, their derivatives, and therapeutic uses. The claims likely cover the entire class of molecules with defined structural features, providing broad exclusivity within that chemical space.
2. How does the patent landscape affect the value of WO2006014353?
The surrounding patent landscape, including overlapping patents and prior art, influences enforceability and freedom to operate. A dense patent environment can both strengthen strategic positioning and pose infringement risks.
3. Can this patent be challenged or limited during prosecution?
Yes, patent offices examine novelty and inventive step. The applicant may need to narrow claims or amend disclosures to overcome objections, especially if prior art reveals similar compounds.
4. How does geographic patent protection impact its strategic value?
Patent rights obtained in key markets like the US, EU, or China determine regional exclusivity. Differing national laws can affect the scope and enforceability of claims, influencing commercialization strategies.
5. What are the future considerations for stakeholders regarding this patent?
Continuous monitoring for patent expirations, potential invalidations, or follow-up filings is essential. Innovators should consider designing around such patents or licensing agreements to maximize market access.
References
- WIPO Patent WO2006014353.
- WIPO Patent Database.
- Patent Office Publishes and Examiner Reports (National phase filings).
