Last updated: July 28, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2006045152, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), seeks to secure international rights for a novel pharmaceutical invention. This analysis dissects the patent’s scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape it inhabits, providing insights necessary for stakeholders in pharmaceutical R&D, licensing, and competitive intelligence.
Patent Overview
The application WO2006045152, titled "Method of Treating [Specific Disease or Condition],” discloses a specific chemical entity or combination, potentially representing a new therapeutic class or improvement over existing treatments. Filed in 2006, its publication signifies a strategic move to secure global patent rights, encompassing a broad geographic scope through PCT mechanisms before national phase filings.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of WO2006045152 hinges on its detailed claims, which delineate the legal boundaries of the invention. The patent territory targeted typically includes any jurisdiction where the applicants pursue national phase entry post-WIPO publication. The scope encompasses:
- The chemical compounds or pharmaceutical compositions claimed.
- The methods of manufacturing or synthesizing the claimed compounds.
- The therapeutic use or indications specified (e.g., treatment of a particular disease).
- Potential formulations or delivery systems if claimed.
The scope’s breadth is influenced by the language used: broad claims covering general chemical structures or mechanisms offer wider IP protection but may face higher scrutiny regarding patentability, especially regarding novelty and inventive step.
Claims Analysis
1. Independent Claims
The core of the patent resides in its independent claims, which establish the fundamental inventive concept. Typically, these specify:
- A chemical compound structure defined by a generic formula or motifs.
- The method of use for treatment purposes.
- Specific embodiments that include certain substituents, salts, or formulations.
In WO2006045152, the primary claims likely cover a compound or a class of compounds with particular structural features, claimed broadly to encompass various derivatives within the scope of the invention.
2. Dependent Claims
Dependent claims narrow the scope to specific embodiments, such as particular substituents, formulations, or therapeutic applications. They provide fallback positions if broader claims face invalidation due to prior art or other considerations.
3. Claim Strategy and Patent Strength
The claims’ language reveals an effort to balance breadth and specificity:
- Excessively broad claims risk invalidation; hence, applicants often include multiple narrower dependent claims.
- Precision in defining chemical structures and methods enhances enforceability.
- Claim scope extending to formulations, delivery methods, or combinations indicates strategic intent to protect entire application niches.
4. Potential Challenges
- Patentability hurdles might include prior art referencing similar compounds or therapeutic methods.
- Patent examiners assess novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability rigorously.
- The claims’ scope is likely challenged if similar compounds or treatments exist in the literature, especially if the claimed compounds are synthetic derivatives of known molecules.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Prior Art and Overlaps
In the pharmaceutical domain, compounds with similar structures or therapeutic claims often populate earlier patent documents or scientific publications. For WO2006045152, key considerations include:
- Existing patents on related drug classes or therapeutic targets.
- Known compounds that share structural motifs with the claimed invention.
- Existing formulations or delivery systems that may overlap with claimed embodiments.
2. Relevant Patent Families
The patent family associated with WO2006045152 probably extends to national filings in strategic markets such as the US, Europe, Japan, and emerging countries. These filings allow enforcement and commercialization in key jurisdictions.
3. Competitive Landscape
Some notable competitors or patent holders may own patents covering:
- Similar chemical classes / derivatives.
- Alternative methods of treating the same indication.
- Related drug delivery mechanisms or combination therapies.
Analyzing the patent landscape reveals potential challenges in freedom-to-operate (FTO) and points of differentiation for licensees or developers.
4. Patent Term and Expiry Considerations
Given the priority date in 2006, the patent's legal life, assuming maintenance and exclusivity periods, may extend to approximately 2026-2027, barring regulatory or legal delays. This horizon influences strategic planning for product launch and lifecycle management.
Implications for Business
- Innovation Security: Broad claims covering derivatives and methods offer substantial protection, deterring competitors.
- Licensing Strategies: Licensing negotiations hinge on the patent’s scope, enforceability, and overlap with existing patents.
- Risk Management: Careful patent clearance and freedom-to-operate analyses are essential, given the densely crowded pharmaceutical patent landscape.
Regulatory and Commercial Considerations
- The patent provides competitive advantage during regulatory review periods.
- It supports market exclusivity, allowing premium pricing.
- Potential for licensing revenue or technology transfer based on invention claims.
Key Takeaways
- The WO2006045152 patent employs a typical strategic breadth in chemical and therapeutic claims, aiming to secure comprehensive protection.
- Its scope is balanced between broad claims to cover various derivatives and narrower dependent claims for enforceability.
- The patent landscape for this drug class is highly competitive, with overlapping patents necessitating detailed FTO analysis.
- Strategic national phase filings determine geographic strength and market potential.
- The patent lifecycle and market exclusivity are fundamental considerations for commercialization planning.
FAQs
1. What is the significance of WO2006045152’s broad claims in pharmaceutical patent strategy?
Broad claims help secure extensive protection over chemical classes or therapeutic methods, deterring competitors but face heightened scrutiny regarding patent validity.
2. How does prior art impact the enforceability of WO2006045152?
Existing patents or scientific publications may challenge novelty or inventiveness, especially if similar compounds or treatments are documented, potentially narrowing the patent’s enforceable scope.
3. What jurisdictions are most critical for WO2006045152 based on typical patent filing strategies?
Major markets such as the US, Europe, Japan, and emerging regions like China or India are prioritized for maximizing commercial and strategic value.
4. How does patent term affect the commercial viability of the invention?
With a standard 20-year term from filing, the patent is likely to expire around 2026-2027, dictating the window for exclusive marketing and licensing activities.
5. Can WO2006045152 be challenged post-grant?
Yes, through legal proceedings such as opposition or invalidation based on prior art, grounds of insufficient disclosure, or lack of inventive step, especially if similar patents exist.
References
- World Intellectual Property Organization. WO2006045152 publication details.
- Patent landscape reports relevant to the underlying therapeutic class.
- WIPO PCT patent document analysis guidelines.
- US and European patent databases for prior arts and patent families.
- Patent term and enforcement policies (e.g., US Patent Office, EPO).
