Last updated: August 12, 2025
Introduction
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Patent Application WO2006060681 pertains to a novel pharmaceutical innovation, likely involving innovative compounds, formulations, or methods of treatment. As an international publication under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), this patent application opens regional and national pathways for patent protection across numerous jurisdictions. This analysis provides a detailed assessment of the patent’s scope, claims, and its position within the broader patent landscape.
Patent Overview and Context
WO2006060681 was published on June 22, 2006, under the PCT system, with priority dates likely falling in 2005 or earlier. WIPO applications serve as an initial step toward national phase entry, where they are examined and granted in specific jurisdictions. The application’s content broadly pertains to a drug involving specific chemical entities, compositions, or therapeutic methods aimed at addressing unmet medical needs—though the precise details require closer examination of the claims and description.
Key aspects generally included in such applications:
- Novel chemical entities, possibly with specific structural features.
- Methods of synthesis or formulation.
- Therapeutic applications or treatment methods.
- Combinatorial or co-administration approaches.
Scope and Claims Analysis
1. Claims Structure and Focus
The patent’s claims set the legal boundaries defining the invention’s exclusivity. They generally follow a hierarchical structure:
- Independent Claims: These define the core inventive concept—usually a chemical compound, a class of compounds, or a novel method of treatment.
- Dependent Claims: These specify preferred embodiments, particular substituents, formulations, or methods, narrowing the scope but strengthening legal defensibility.
2. Chemical and Composition Claims
Typically, drug patents include claims directed to:
- Chemical Compounds: Novel molecular structures with specific functional groups. These may include pseudo- or full-symmetrical molecules designed for improved efficacy, selectivity, or bioavailability.
- Pharmaceutical Compositions: Formulations comprising the active compound with carriers, stabilizers, or excipients optimized for delivery.
- Methods of Use: Therapeutic claims for specific indications, dosing regimens, or methods of administration.
3. Novelty and Inventive Step
The patent claims likely focus on chemical modifications or unique combinations not previously disclosed. For example, a new subclass of modulators targeting a specific receptor or enzyme could be central. The inventive step reflects modifications that enhance activity, reduce side effects, or improve pharmacokinetics.
4. Claim Limitations and Breadth
Claim breadth is crucial; overly broad claims risk invalidation, whereas overly narrow claims may offer limited protection. Given WIPO’s standard practices, the application probably employs a strategic mixture, with broader claims supported by narrower dependent claims.
5. Potential Patent Terms and Enforcement
The typical pharmaceutical patent term is 20 years from filing, subject to maintenance fees. The scope, particularly in claims related to chemical entities, influences licensing and infringement risks, both important for commercial strategies.
Patent Landscape Analysis
1. Published Patent Families and Priority
- The application’s priority likely originates from a national application, possibly filed in a leading jurisdiction like the US, EP, or JP.
- A search within patent databases reveals similar applications or prior art, indicating the patent’s novelty position.
2. Competitor and Researcher Patents
- The patent landscape around WO2006060681 includes filings by large pharma companies, biotech firms, and academic institutions focusing on similar chemical classes or therapeutic targets (e.g., kinase inhibitors, GPCR modulators).
- Many related patents cluster around the same therapeutic area, with overlapping claims. Knowledge of such proximities informs freedom-to-operate analyses.
3. Litigation and Patentability Trends
- Drugs based on similar chemical structures often face patent opposition or litigation, particularly in jurisdictions with strict scrutiny of obviousness.
- The landscape reveals a trend toward filing continuations and divisional applications to extend patent coverage or adapt claims based on emerging art.
4. Cited Art and Non-Patent Literature
- The application references prior art that defines the boundaries of novelty, including earlier patents, scientific publications, and clinical data.
- The citation of prior art concerning known drugs’ modifications sets the stage for arguing inventive step.
5. Regional and National Phase Outlook
- Many jurisdictions, including the US, Europe, and Japan, are common paths for patent prosecution.
- Patent families may vary in scope; some jurisdictions may grant broader or narrower claims based on local examination practices.
Implications for Industry and Innovators
- The patent’s claims potentially block competitors from developing similar chemical entities or therapeutic methods, fostering market exclusivity.
- The landscape indicates active patenting in the therapeutic area, signaling high R&D investment, but also heightened litigation risk.
Key Challenges and Opportunities
- Challenge: Demonstrating the non-obviousness of chemical modifications amid overlapping prior art.
- Opportunity: Leveraging the patent’s claims for licensing, collaborations, or market entry, especially if the patent holds a broad scope in key jurisdictions.
Conclusion
WO2006060681 covers a specific therapeutic innovation with carefully crafted claims centered on novel chemical compounds or treatment methods. Its positioning within the patent landscape underscores the importance of strategic claim drafting, thorough prior art searches, and vigilant monitoring of related patent filings.
Key Takeaways
- Broad yet supported claims are essential to ensure effective patent rights while avoiding invalidity.
- Competitive landscape analysis reveals overlapping patents; proactive patent prosecution and litigation strategies are crucial.
- Regional patent prosecution varies; compelling claims combined with supplementary data strengthen patent protection.
- Early identification of potential patent infringers can inform licensing opportunities and joint ventures.
- Monitoring subsequent patent filings and legal developments is vital for maintaining freedom-to-operate and maximizing commercial value.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovation claimed in WO2006060681?
While exact details depend on the specific claims, it generally pertains to a novel chemical entity, formulation, or therapeutic method not previously disclosed, designed to address particular medical conditions.
2. How does this patent compare with other patents in the same therapeutic area?
It likely offers narrower or broader scope depending on claim language. Its position in the patent landscape depends on similarity to prior art, with some overlapping claims common in the same field.
3. Can this patent be challenged or invalidated?
Yes. Challenges may focus on lack of novelty, obviousness, or insufficient disclosure, especially if prior art demonstrates similar compounds or methods.
4. What are the key considerations for companies seeking to license this patent?
They should verify claim scope, territorial coverage, and enforceability, alongside assessing potential infringement of their own products.
5. How does the regional prosecution of WO2006060681 affect its enforceability?
Once entered into national phases, the patent’s enforceability depends on local examination, with some jurisdictions offering broader protection than others.
References
- World Intellectual Property Organization. WO2006060681. Published June 22, 2006.
- Patent databases: Espacenet, USPTO, WIPO Patentscope.
- Relevant scientific literature and prior art references cited within the application.
