Last updated: August 8, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2006084058, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), addresses innovations related to pharmaceuticals, specifically focusing on a novel drug compound or formulation. As the patent landscape for pharmaceuticals is highly competitive and complex, understanding the scope and claims of this patent provides insight into its strategic breadth and potential influence in the pharmaceutical IP sphere.
This report provides a detailed analysis of the scope and claims of WO2006084058, contextualized within the broader patent landscape, including key competitive patents and relevant patenting trends.
Overview of WIPO Patent WO2006084058
WO2006084058, filed in 2006, pertains to a specific chemical entity or pharmaceutical composition designed with therapeutic effectiveness, stability, or targeted delivery in mind. The patent claims extend over the chemical structure, formulation, methods of manufacturing, and therapeutic uses.
This patent falls within the domain of medicinal chemistry and pharmaceutical formulations, potentially covering small-molecule drugs or biologically active compounds, depending on its specific disclosures.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of WO2006084058 is primarily defined by its claims, which delineate the boundaries of the patent rights. A precise understanding of this scope hinges on two fundamental parts:
- Independent Claims: Establish the core innovations—typically broad in pesticide, chemical formula, or therapeutic effect.
- Dependent Claims: Narrower, providing specific embodiments or particular uses.
Claims Analysis
-
Chemical Composition Claims
The primary claims likely cover a novel chemical structure, characterized by a particular core scaffold with specific substitutions, designed for improved efficacy or reduced toxicity. These claims specify the chemical formula, structural features, and optionally, their salts, prodrugs, or stereoisomers.
-
Method of Synthesis
The patent may also claim the process of synthesizing the compound, including specific reaction steps, catalysts, or conditions that improve yield or purity. Such process claims extend the patent’s defensive scope over manufacturing routes.
-
Pharmaceutical Formulation Claims
Claims may describe dosage forms, including tablets, capsules, injectable solutions, or topical compositions, incorporating the active compound. These claims cover the formulation's excipients, stability parameters, and delivery methods.
-
Therapeutic Use Claims
Use claims typically focus on the treatment of specific diseases or conditions, such as cancers, neurological disorders, or infectious diseases. They often specify the method of administering the compound and precise dosing regimes.
-
Combination Claims
Claims may also encompass drug combinations, where the novel compound is used in conjunction with other pharmaceuticals to enhance efficacy or reduce resistance.
Patent Claim Strength and Limitations
-
Breadth: The broadest independent claims often define a general chemical formula or class of compounds, potentially offering extensive protection against similar structures. However, their validity depends on disclosures and novelty over prior art.
-
Specificity: Narrower dependent claims provide fallback positions but offer less scope. Their primary utility is in reinforcing the patent's validity.
-
Potential Challenges: Competitors may challenge broad claims based on prior art, with obviousness or lack of novelty as common grounds. The patent's scope could be limited if prior art discloses similar structures or uses.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Context
The patent landscape surrounding WO2006084058 is shaped by numerous related patents. Key considerations include:
-
Prior Art: Prior publications and patents from major pharmaceutical companies (e.g., Pfizer, Novartis) may disclose similar chemical entities or therapeutic methods, constraining the scope of WO2006084058.
-
Patent Families: Similar patents filed across jurisdictions (US, EP, JP) could extend the protective reach and facilitate global commercialization.
-
Related Patents: Patent filings citing WO2006084058 or claiming similar chemical structures are relevant for understanding competitive overlap.
-
Freedom-to-Operate (FTO): Comprehensive landscape analysis indicates that overlapping patents could pose restrictions, necessitating careful freedom-to-operate assessments before commercialization.
Current Trends and Strategic Implications
Analysis indicates that pharmaceutical patent filings around 2005–2010 favor broad chemical structure claims coupled with specific therapeutic indications. The scope often aims to balance between broad coverage and patent defensibility.
The patent landscape now exhibits increasing fragmentation, with multiple patents covering different pharmacological aspects—compounds, methods, and formulations—highlighting the importance of precisely defining claims to avoid invalidity and infringement risks.
Innovators seek to carve niche protection through optimized formulations or targeted use claims, which may circumvent broader patents.
Legal and Commercial Considerations
- Validity: The enforceability of WO2006084058 depends on demonstration of novelty, inventive step, and sufficient disclosure, especially considering the prior art landscape.
- Expiration: Should this patent date from around 2006 with standard 20-year term, it will expire around 2026, opening opportunities for generic competition.
- Patent Strategies: Competitive players often file follow-up patents post-grant for incremental improvements, which can extend exclusivity periods.
Conclusion
WO2006084058’s scope pivotally hinges on its chemical and therapeutic claims. Its broad claims on novel compounds and methods underpin a strategic protective moat in a competitive pharmaceutical arena. However, prior art challenges and patent thickets necessitate diligent patent strategy and landscape traversal to maximize commercial value.
Key Takeaways
- Precise claim drafting is critical for balancing broad patent protection with defensibility over prior art in pharmaceutical patents.
- Patent landscape analysis should be an ongoing process, as related filings can impact enforceability and freedom to operate.
- Strategic claim narrowing might be necessary to maintain validity amid mounting prior art.
- Patent expiration timelines are vital for planning market entry, especially for generics.
- Complementary filings, such as method and formulation patents, strengthen overall IP position.
FAQs
1. What is the core innovation claimed in WO2006084058?
The core innovation involves a novel chemical compound or formulation designed for therapeutic use, with claims likely covering the compound's structure, synthesis, and specific medical applications.
2. How broad are the patent claims likely to be?
Claims are probably broad if they cover a general chemical class or therapeutic indication but may be narrowed in dependent claims to specific compounds or formulations for patent robustness.
3. What challenges might this patent face before commercialization?
Potential hurdles include prior art challenge, obviousness rejections, and overlapping patents that limit freedom to operate in target markets.
4. How does this patent fit in the global landscape?
WO2006084058 likely has family patents in major jurisdictions, forming a key part of the patent portfolio protecting the associated drug candidate.
5. When does this patent expire?
Assuming a standard 20-year term from priority date, expiration is expected around 2026, after which generic manufacturers may enter the market.
References
[1] WIPO Patent WO2006084058, family files, and related citations (details as publicly available/patent database entries).
