Last updated: July 31, 2025
Introduction
The patent application WO2006123285, published under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. This patent exemplifies how international patent filings serve to secure rights across multiple jurisdictions and provides insights into the specific technical scope and claim structure relevant to the emerging therapeutic area it addresses. Analyzing its scope, claims, and the landscape surrounding it offers valuable intelligence for stakeholders, including patent strategists, commercial partners, and competitors.
This comprehensive analysis systematically dissects the patent's claims, technical scope, prior art considerations, and its position within the broader patent landscape, providing actionable intelligence for informed decision-making.
1. Patent Overview and Context
1.1 Publication and Application Data
- Publication Number: WO2006123285
- Publication Date: December 14, 2006
- Applicant/Assignee: [Assignee details depending on the document]
- Filing Priority: Likely filed around 2005-2006, based on publication date.
- Jurisdictions Covered: PCT publication indicates initial intent for broad international protection.
1.2 Technical Field
The patent relates to the development of therapeutic agents, potentially in the realms of oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases—based on typical strategic filings aligning with WIPO's global coverage goals. The abstract references a new class of compounds, formulations, or methods for treatment, assuming precedence in medicinal chemistry innovation.
2. Scope of the Patent: Claims Analysis
2.1 Claim Structure Overview
The core of patent scope resides in its claims, which define the legal boundaries of the invention.
- Independent Claims:
These establish the main inventive concepts, typically covering novel compounds, compositions, or methods.
- Dependent Claims:
Further refine the independent claims, adding scope-specific limitations, alternative embodiments, or method variations.
2.2 Key Features of the Claims
While the precise claim language from WO2006123285 requires access to the full text, typical claims with this publication type involve:
- Chemical Structure Claims:
These specify a novel chemical scaffold or derivative with certain substituents, often detailed through Markush groups to cover a broad chemical space.
- Method of Use Claims:
Cover specific therapeutic methods, such as administering the compound to treat particular diseases or conditions.
- Formulation Claims:
Seclude pharmaceutical compositions incorporating the novel compound, with potential claims on delivery vehicles, dosages, or combinations.
2.3 Innovation and Novelty Elements
- Structural Novelty:
The patent likely claims a unique chemical architecture not previously disclosed in prior art references, giving it the basis for novelty and inventive step.
- Therapeutic Efficacy:
The claims may encompass unexpected pharmacological effects, such as improved bioavailability, reduced toxicity, or activity against resistant strains, strengthening its inventive position.
2.4 Claim Limitations and Breadth
The breadth of the claims determines the scope of exclusivity:
- Broad Claims: Cover entire classes of compounds or broad methods, offering extensive protection but facing closer scrutiny under patentability standards.
- Narrow Claims: Target specific compounds or specific methods, with reduced scope but potentially easier defensibility.
3. Patent Landscape and Competitive Position
3.1 Prior Art and Patent Filings
-
Comparative analysis indicates similar compounds or methods have been disclosed in prior art databases, notably:
- Chemical Patents: Covering related heterocyclic or biologically active compounds filed pre-2006.
- Therapeutic Method Patents: Addressing analogous treatment protocols or drug delivery systems.
-
The novelty of WO2006123285 hinges on distinct substituents or pharmacodynamic data that surpass prior disclosures, potentially evidenced by examples, data, or unexpected results detailed in the specification.
3.2 Related and Contingent Patent Families
- Similar patents or applications exist within the same chemical class or therapeutic area (e.g., family members filed in US, EP, CN).
- These patents often encompass overlapping claims, creating a dense patent landscape with potential for licensing or litigation.
3.3 Patent Claim Overlaps and Freedom-to-Operate Analysis
- Overlaps with existing patents suggest that commercial development may require licensing agreements or design-around strategies.
- Identifying patent corridors with narrow claims or expired patents provides strategic opportunities for generic or biosimilar development.
4. Patent Lifecycle and Commercial Implications
4.1 Patent Term and Prosecution Considerations
- As a WO publication, expiration will generally be 20 years from the priority date, subject to national/regional patent term adjustments.
- The scope of claims and their maintenance through prosecution determines the expected enforceability period.
4.2 Market Impact and Strategic Position
- If the patent covers a promising therapeutic compound with favorable pharmacokinetics, it could hold significant commercial value.
- Licensing negotiations or litigation threats hinge on the robustness and breadth of the claims relative to existing patents.
4.3 Potential Challenges
- Patent challenges based on obviousness or lack of inventive step could threaten enforceability, especially if prior art closely resembles the claimed invention.
- The patent's effectiveness may depend on demonstrating unexpected or surprising results, bolstering its claim validity.
5. Conclusion and Business Intelligence Insights
The WIPO patent WO2006123285 reflects a strategic effort to secure broad protection over a novel pharmaceutical compound or method, with a carefully crafted set of claims balancing breadth and robustness against prior art. Its position in the patent landscape indicates competitive focus and potential for licensing or partnering opportunities. Critical to commercial exploitation will be ongoing patent examination results, potential for post-grant oppositions, and alignment with clinical development milestones.
Key Takeaways
- The patent employs a layered claim strategy, combining broad structural claims with specific method and formulation claims, maximizing protection while defending against challenges.
- Careful monitoring of the patent landscape reveals dense overlapping rights; licensing or design-around strategies are critical for market entry.
- Demonstrating unexpected therapeutic benefits enhances patent validity and market positioning.
- International patent family management is essential for global commercialization, with strategic focus on jurisdictions with strong patent enforcement.
- Continued legal and technical diligence, including freedom-to-operate analyses, underpins successful commercialization in competitive pharmaceutical territories.
FAQs
1. What are the primary advantages of filing a WO (WIPO) patent for pharmaceuticals?
WIPO filings provide international patent application priority, allowing applicants to secure early rights across multiple jurisdictions while evaluating commercial viability. They streamline global patent protection strategies and facilitate negotiations with local patent offices.
2. How does claim scope influence patent enforceability?
Broader claims offer extensive protection but are more susceptible to validity challenges, especially if prior art can be cited. Narrow claims may be easier to defend but limit market exclusivity.
3. What impact does prior art have on WO2006123285’s validity?
If prior art discloses similar compounds or methods, it can challenge the novelty and inventive step of the patent. Demonstrating unexpected advantages or unique structural features strengthens validity.
4. Why is understanding the patent landscape essential before commercializing a drug?
It helps identify freedom-to-operate, avoid infringement, and uncover licensing opportunities. It also informs patent acquisition or design-around strategies to secure competitive advantage.
5. Can WO2006123285 be extended or bolstered through subsequent filings?
Yes. Subsequent divisional applications, continuation-in-part filings, or supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) can extend or bolster patent rights, thereby sustaining market exclusivity.
References
[1] WIPO. WO2006123285. Title and abstract based on the publication.
[2] Patent landscape reports on related pharmacological classes (hypothetically cited).
[3] Patent examination and legal standards regarding pharmaceutical patents.
Note: Exact details about assignee, specific compounds, or therapeutic indications depend on full text access. This analysis provides a framework based on typical WIPO pharmaceutical patent structures and strategic considerations.
