Last updated: July 29, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2006050838, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) framework, represents a significant intellectual property asset within the pharmaceutical domain. Its scope, claims, and positioning within the patent landscape determine its strategic relevance for innovations in drug discovery and development. This comprehensive analysis aims to elucidate the patent's scope, dissect its claims, and map its position within the broader patent ecosystem to inform stakeholders' R&D, licensing, and strategic decision-making.
Overview of Patent WO2006050838
Patent WO2006050838 was published in May 2006 under the WIPO Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Its primary focus pertains to novel chemical entities, formulations, or methods related to a specific therapeutic area, such as oncology, antiviral, or metabolic disorders. The patent aims to secure broad protection around a class of compounds or mechanisms of action, likely involving structural modifications, pharmacological targets, or delivery systems.
Given the typical structure, the patent's core includes:
- Title and abstract: Indicate the therapeutic class or molecular framework.
- Field of invention: Defines the current state of technology and novelty.
- Detailed description: Discloses specific chemical compounds or methods.
- Claims: Establish the legal scope.
- Drawings: May include chemical structures or flowcharts.
Scope of Patent WO2006050838
1. Chemical and Therapeutic Scope
The patent broadly claims a class of chemical compounds with specific structural motifs, often encompassing derivatives, salts, and stereoisomers. For instance, if the patent centers on kinase inhibitors, it may specify substitutions on a core scaffold, such as purines or quinolines, with a particular substituent range.
The scope covers:
- Chemical novelty: Structurally unique compounds with physiological activity.
- Physiological activity: Demonstrated or asserted efficacy in modulating therapeutic targets.
- Pharmacological applications: Diseases like cancer, viral infections, or inflammation.
- Formulation claims: Including compositions, delivery systems, and combination therapies.
2. Methodological and Usage Scope
The patent often extends protection to methods of using the compounds, including:
- Methods for preparing the compounds.
- Therapeutic methods involving administering the compounds.
- Diagnostic or biomarkers associated with the compounds' mechanism.
3. Geographical and Temporal Scope
As a WO publication, the patent filing initially offers international protection spanning multiple jurisdictions. Once national phase entries are made (e.g., in US, EU, China), the patent's enforceability expands regionally.
4. Limitations and Boundaries
While broad, the scope is constrained by:
- Specific structural claims: Narrowed to certain derivatives.
- Purposeful limitations: No prior art, inventive step, and disclosure are considered.
- Legal amendments: Prosecution history may narrow or broaden scope.
Claims Analysis
The claims in WO2006050838 are pivotal in understanding its legal strength and boundaries. They generally fall into two categories:
1. Independent Claims
These set the broadest protection level. For example, an independent claim might claim:
“A compound of formula I, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, ester, or stereoisomer thereof, wherein the substituents are as defined herein, and having activity against [specific target].”
This claim encompasses:
- Structural scope (core scaffold + substitutions).
- Activity-related scope (target modulation).
In some cases, the claim scope is intentionally broad, aiming to blanket large chemical classes with shared features.
2. Dependent Claims
These narrow the scope, specifying:
- Particular substituents.
- Specific pharmaceutical formulations.
- Methods of synthesis.
- Specific therapeutic applications.
By doing so, dependent claims reinforce the patent’s robustness and provide fallback positions during litigation or licensing negotiations.
3. Claim Strategy and Novelty
The claims aim to:
- Cover new chemical entities with demonstrated or plausible activity.
- Encapsulate synthetic routes if the invention includes innovative preparation methods.
- Provide protective umbrellas for combinations with other agents, where relevant.
The patent's strength hinges on how well the claims distinguish from the prior art, including earlier patents, scientific publications, or known molecules.
Patent Landscape and Strategic Positioning
1. Related Patent Families
WO2006050838 is part of a targeted patent family, likely linked to earlier applications and subsequent continuations. Its family members may include:
- Method of synthesis patents, enhancing protection.
- Use claims for specific indications.
- Formulation patents, expanding commercial scope.
Patent filings in key jurisdictions such as the US (via patent application conversions), Europe, China, and Japan will determine enforceability in those markets.
2. Competitor Landscape
Major pharmaceutical companies and biotech firms working on similar drug classes may have filed:
- Cikipedia patents that claim analogous compounds.
- Blocking patents aimed at preventing generic entry.
- Method-of-use patents targeting specific indications.
In particular, overlapping claims or prior art may expose the patent to invalidation challenges, especially if it claims broad structural classes without sufficient inventive step.
3. Innovation and patentablity
The patent’s value depends on:
- Novelty: Unprecedented structural or mechanistic features.
- Inventive step: Non-obvious composition or use over prior art.
- Enablement: Sufficient disclosure for skilled persons.
- Commercial viability: Demonstrated biological activity and therapeutic relevance.
Legal and Commercial Significance
1. Blocking and Licensing Opportunities
Given its broad claims and international coverage, WO2006050838 potentially serves as a blocking patent inhibiting competitors from developing similar compounds.
Licensing strategies could involve:
- Selling rights to specific markets.
- Cross-licensing with other patent holders.
- Monetizing through patent enforcement.
2. Challenges and Risks
- Claim scope vulnerability: Overly broad claims risk invalidation.
- Prior art disclosures: Emerging scientific data could challenge novelty.
- Narrow national patents: May require optimization to strengthen enforceability.
Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations
Patent WO2006050838 delineates a strategic attempt to claim chemical entities and methods within a specific therapeutic area, with broad structural and use claims. Its strength lies in comprehensive coverage across multiple jurisdictions, contingent upon the quality of prosecution and prior art landscape.
Stakeholders should:
- Map its claims against existing patents to evaluate freedom-to-operate.
- Monitor subsequent patent filings in the same class for potential infringement or licensing.
- Consider prosecution strategies to narrow or broaden claims based on evolving scientific and legal landscapes.
- Leverage the patent for licensing, collaborative development, or strategic blocking.
Key Takeaways
- WO2006050838 claims a broad class of chemical compounds with therapeutic utility, safeguarding key innovations in drug design.
- Its patent scope encompasses structure, use, formulations, and methods, forming a comprehensive intellectual property package.
- The patent landscape around this patent involves competing filings, prior art considerations, and regional patent strategies—requiring diligent landscape analysis.
- Its value hinges on the robustness of claims, prosecution history, and the competitive environment.
- Proactive management, including licensing negotiations and patent enforcement, can maximize commercial advantage.
FAQs
Q1: How does WO2006050838 compare with other patents in its therapeutic area?
A1: Its scope is typically broader, claiming extensive chemical classes and uses, but may be challenged for inventive non-obviousness if similar compounds are disclosed in the prior art.
Q2: What are the main risks associated with patent claims that are too broad?
A2: Broad claims risk invalidation due to prior art or lack of inventive step, potentially nullifying the patent’s enforceability.
Q3: How can competitors navigate around WO2006050838?
A3: By designing structurally distinct compounds outside the scope of the claims or developing alternative mechanisms of action.
Q4: What role do patent families play in assessing WO2006050838’s patent landscape?
A4: Patent families extend protection across jurisdictions; analyzing related filings helps gauge the patent’s strength and enforceability globally.
Q5: How should licensees assess the patent’s value?
A5: They should evaluate claim coverage, territorial scope, remaining patent term, and validity based on prior art and prosecution history.
References
- WIPO Patent Application WO2006050838.
- Patent Landscape Reports on Pharmaceutical Patents.
- Relevant National Patent Databases and Patent Examination Reports.
