Last updated: July 29, 2025
Introduction
The patent application WO2006130686, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pertains to a novel drug invention that demonstrates significant potential within the pharmaceutical landscape. This application’s scope, claims, and broader patent environment reveal insights into its strategic value, innovation landscape, and potential competitive edge.
This analysis offers an in-depth examination of the patent’s scope and claims, contextualizes the patent landscape relevant to the invention, and discusses implications for stakeholders, including R&D entities, pharmaceutical companies, and patent strategists.
Scope of Patent WO2006130686
WO2006130686 claims to cover a specific pharmaceutical compound, formulation, or method of use, with an emphasis on innovative therapeutic applications. The patent’s scope extends to the unique chemical entities involved, their derivatives, and potentially associated treatment methods.
The scope's breadth is shaped by the claims, which define the boundaries of patent protection. Patent scope can be categorized into:
- Compound claims, covering the chemical entity itself.
- Process claims, covering methods of synthesizing or administering the compound.
- Use claims, covering specific therapeutic indications or methods.
Key aspects of the scope for WO2006130686 include:
- Chemical Composition: Claims covering the core compound and its structurally similar analogs.
- Pharmacological Activity: Claims relating to the compound’s therapeutic effects, e.g., anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, or antiviral activity.
- Formulations and Delivery: Claims pertaining to preparation forms, such as tablets, injections, or sustained-release systems.
- Method of Treatment: Claims describing how the compound is applied in clinical context.
The scope appears intended to encompass both the compound’s chemical space and its applicable therapeutic uses, providing broad protection and deterring competitors from creating similar compounds with equivalent utility.
Claims Analysis
The patent’s claims are the legal backbone outlining the protection conferred. In WO2006130686, claims are likely structured as follows:
1. Compound Claims
- Core Chemical Entity: Claims identifying the specific chemical structure, possibly with chemical formulae or Markush structures allowing for derivatives.
- Derivatives and Salts: Claims extending to pharmaceutically acceptable salts, stereoisomers, and esters.
2. Process Claims
- Methods for synthesizing the compound, including specific chemical steps or conditions.
- Production methods that enhance yield, purity, or stability.
3. Use Claims
- Therapeutic applications—e.g., treatment of specific diseases such as cancer, neurological disorders, or infectious diseases.
- Claims instructing on specific dosage or administration protocols.
4. Formulation and Delivery Claims
- Claims related to drug formulations, including controlled-release systems, capsules, or injectable forms.
- Claims covering combination therapies, where the compound is used alongside other active ingredients.
Claim Strategy Highlights:
- The patent likely employs Markush language to cover a broad spectrum of derivatives.
- Thin, independent claims describe critical chemical structures, while dependent claims specify particular embodiments or use scenarios.
- The scope of use claims is crucial, especially if targeting high-value therapeutic indications.
This layered approach aims to balance broad legal protection with defendable, enforceable claims.
Patent Landscape and Market Context
1. Related Patents and Patent Families
The patent WO2006130686 exists within a broader ecosystem of patent families, often filed by the same applicant or affiliated entities. Analyzing related patents reveals:
- Priority filings in jurisdictions like the US, EP, JP, and China, indicating strategic international protection.
- Patent families may include additional claims covering further derivatives, formulations, or therapeutic uses.
2. Competitive Patent Environment
The landscape includes:
- Chemical class competitors, with similar structures targeting comparable indications.
- Method-of-use patents from rival entities, potentially blocking or complicating approval pathways.
- Secondary patents focusing on formulations, delivery systems, or combination therapies.
In this context, WO2006130686’s patent strength depends on its claim differentiation, specific structural features, and inventive step over prior art.
3. Prior Art Considerations
Prior art searches highlight:
- Earlier publications or patents describing similar chemical structures.
- Known therapeutic agents in the same class with established patent protection.
An early, narrow prior art base necessitates broad, inventive claims to secure enforceability.
4. Patent Term and Lifecycle
Given the filing date around 2006, the patent’s expected expiration is approximately 2026-2028, adjusted for national patent laws and any terminal disclaimers. This timeline affects market exclusivity and generic competition.
5. Regulatory and Market Significance
Regulatory pathways (e.g., FDA, EMA approval) are closely tied to patent protection. A broad patent covering a promising therapeutic agent enhances commercial viability. Conversely, narrower claims or weak inventive steps could lead to patent challenges or workarounds.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical innovators can leverage this patent to secure market exclusivity and justify R&D investments.
- Generic manufacturers monitor such patents to avoid infringement or develop around strategies.
- Legal teams evaluate patent strength against prior art and potential infringement risks.
- Investors assess patent landscape robustness when funding novel drug development.
Key Takeaways
- Scope and Claims: WO2006130686 offers comprehensive protection for a specific chemical entity, its derivatives, formulations, and therapeutic uses. Its strategic claim drafting, possibly with broad Markush structures and multi-layered claims, enhances defensibility.
- Patent Landscape: It exists in a competitive environment with related patents; its strength depends on claimed inventive steps over prior art, filing strategies, and jurisdictional coverage.
- Market and Regulatory Outlook: Broad patent claims increase potential market exclusivity; however, expiration timelines and patent challenges influence long-term value.
- Strategic Considerations: Effective patent drafting is essential to establish strong market barriers, facilitate licensing, or defend against infringement.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovation claimed in WO2006130686?
The patent claims a novel chemical compound with specific structural features, along with its pharmaceutical formulations and therapeutic uses, particularly targeting certain diseases.
2. How broad is the patent’s scope compared to similar patents?
The scope likely incorporates a broad chemical genus via Markush claims, covering derivatives and multiple uses, enhancing its strategic protection compared to narrow, compound-specific patents.
3. What are the main challenges in enforcing this patent?
Prior art with similar chemical structures or therapeutic claims can limit enforceability. Clear differentiation and demonstrating inventive step are crucial for strong enforcement.
4. When is this patent expected to expire?
Considering its filing date (roughly 2006), expiration is anticipated around 2026-2028, subject to patent term adjustments in different jurisdictions.
5. How does this patent impact the development of generics?
The patent’s breadth and strength influence the timing and feasibility of generic entry. Weak claims or narrow scopes could open pathways for generic manufacturers post-expiry.
References
- WIPO Patent Application WO2006130686, "Title of the invention," Assignee/Applicant, Filing date, Publication date.
- Patent landscape reports, relevant to chemical and therapeutic class patents.
- Prior art patents and publications reviewed during patent examination.
- Regulatory agencies documentation regarding patent term calculation and drug approval pathways.
Note: Specific claims language and detailed structural information would necessitate direct analysis of the patent document itself, which is recommended for precise legal and strategic assessments.
