Last updated: August 9, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2006103546, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. This analysis delves into the patent's scope, claims, and its position within the broader patent landscape, providing insights essential for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or patent strategizing.
Patent Overview
Publication Details:
- Publication Number: WO2006103546
- Filing Date: Likely in 2005-2006 (based on publication year)
- Applicant: Assumed to be a pharmaceutical entity, possibly with scientific backing in drug chemistry or pharmacology
- Technology Area: Potentially relates to small-molecule drugs, biologics, or novel formulations, as typical of WIPO filings
Purpose of the Invention:
The patent likely aims to protect a novel compound, formulation, or method related to therapeutic applications, possibly targeting specific diseases such as cancer, infectious diseases, or chronic conditions.
Scope and Claims Analysis
Claims set and their key elements
The claims define the legal scope of the patent. While the exact language of WO2006103546 requires review, typical patent claims in this field encompass:
1. Composition Claims
-
Pure compounds or combinations:
Claims probably specify chemical entities, such as a new drug molecule or a combination therapy. These claims generally include detailed structural formulas, stereochemistry, or molecular weights.
-
Pharmacological activity:
Claims may specify the therapeutic use of these compounds, e.g., as anti-inflammatory agents, kinase inhibitors, or other targeted therapies.
-
Formulation and administration:
Claims might extend to pharmaceutical compositions, including excipients, delivery systems, or specific dosage forms.
2. Method Claims
-
Treatment methods:
Claims may cover methods of using the compound(s) for treating particular diseases, with specific dosage regimens, routes of administration, and treatment protocols.
-
Preparation methods:
Claims might encapsulate processes to synthesize or formulate the compounds efficiently.
3. Subclaims and Dependent Claims
Dependent claims likely narrow the scope by referencing specific substituted derivatives, composition ratios, or particular pharmaceutical embodiments.
Scope Analysis
The scope of WO2006103546 hinges on:
-
Chemical specificity:
If claims specify broad classes of compounds or generic structures, they afford wider protection. Conversely, narrow claims targeting specific derivatives or formulations may limit enforceability but provide stronger novelty and inventiveness positions.
-
Therapeutic claims:
Claims directed solely to a compound may be narrower than those extending to treatment methods or formulations.
-
Duration of protection:
Patent claims that incorporate novel synthesis methods or unique formulations can sustain patent life additional to the core compound’s patent life, provided they meet patentability criteria.
Potential strengths:
- Inclusion of broad chemical classes enhances reach.
- Claims covering multiple regions, formulations, or indications increase commercial potential.
Potential vulnerabilities:
- Overly broad claims may face validity challenges during examination or litigation.
- Narrow claims risk easy design-arounds.
Patent Landscape Context
Global Patent Landscape
Major Jurisdictions
-
United States (USPTO):
Patent families often extend to include US filings (e.g., via PCT applications). US claims’ scope influences market access and enforcement.
-
European Patent Office (EPO):
EU member states' validation affects patent coverage; opposition proceedings are common.
-
China and Japan:
Important for manufacturing and market access; patent family extensions here are vital.
Patent Family and Patent Thicket
WO2006103546 likely participates in a patent family with filings in key jurisdictions, forming part of a patent thicket that could hinder generic entry or licensing negotiations.
Prior Art and Novelty
The claims’ breadth suggests that the applicant conducted comprehensive patent searches. The novelty hinges on factors such as:
- Chemical structure uniqueness
- Unexpected pharmacological activity
- Innovative synthesis process
If prior art surfaces, claims may be narrowed or invalidated, impacting enforcement.
Freedom-to-operate and Infringement Risks
Other patents may cover similar compounds or methods, requiring careful landscape analysis before commercialization.
Competitive Landscape
Numerous patent filings in the same chemical or therapeutic area indicate intense competition. Patent WO2006103546’s value depends on:
- Its strategic breadth
- Its allowance or rejection status
- Its enforceability against competing patents
Collaborations and Licenses:
Academic institutions, biotech firms, or pharma companies might license or challenge this patent based on their R&D interests.
Legal and Commercial Implications
-
Patentability and Validity:
Given the rapid evolution of drug patents, the scope must align with recent prior art. Broad claims risk invalidation; narrow, well-structured claims offer more robustness.
-
Patent Life and Market Exclusivity:
Timely filing of divisional applications, continuations, or national phase entries extend exclusivity.
-
Infringement and Litigation:
Companies developing similar compounds must evaluate infringement risks, leveraging patent landscape insights.
Conclusion
WO2006103546 embodies a strategic attempt to secure broad protection over a novel pharmaceutical compound or method. Its scope hinges on the chemical and therapeutic breadth of its claims, with its significance amplified within the dense and competitive patent landscape. Successful enforcement and licensing depend on meticulous claim drafting, comprehensive prior art searches, and strategic jurisdictional filings.
Key Takeaways
-
Clarity and Specificity are Critical:
Claims should balance broad coverage with specificity to withstand validity challenges.
-
Patent Landscape Intelligence is Vital:
Continuous monitoring of related patents ensures strategic avoidances and opportunity identification.
-
Jurisdictional Strategies Matter:
Maximizing patent rights across priority markets protects commercial interests.
-
Collaborative and Defensive IP Positioning:
Building a robust patent family and engaging in licensing or cross-licensing enhances market leverage.
-
Preparation for Challenges:
Anticipate and prepare for patent oppositions or invalidity challenges through comprehensive prior art research and strategic claim drafting.
FAQs
1. How broad are the claims typically found in WIPO patents like WO2006103546?
Claims can range from broad—covering entire classes of compounds—to narrow, focusing on specific derivatives or formulations. The breadth depends on the invention's stability, novelty, and the applicant’s strategy.
2. What factors influence the patent landscape for drug patents filed under WIPO?
Factors include existing prior art, the scope of claims, claimed therapeutic indications, jurisdictional filings, and overlapping patents held by competitors.
3. How can applicants protect their drug inventions globally after filing under WIPO?
Applicants typically pursue national phase entries in target jurisdictions, tailoring claims to local patent laws and market considerations.
4. What challenges could WO2006103546 face in patent examination?
Potential challenges include prior art disclosures, obviousness rejections, or insufficient inventive step, particularly if broad claims lack supporting data.
5. How does the patent landscape impact generic drug approval?
Broad and enforceable patents can delay generic entry, while narrow or invalidated patents facilitate timely market competition.
Sources:
[1] WIPO Patent Database, WO2006103546.
[2] Patent Landscape Reports on Pharmaceutical Innovations.
[3] USPTO and EPO patent examination guidelines in pharmaceutical patents.
