Last updated: July 28, 2025
Introduction
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent WO2009111418 pertains to an innovative pharmaceutical invention aimed at addressing specific medical or therapeutic needs. This patent, filed under the WIPO system, covers claims that define the scope of exclusive rights granted to the inventor. Understanding the patent's scope and landscape is essential for strategic intellectual property (IP) management, competitive positioning, and research & development (R&D) planning.
Patent Overview and Filing Context
WO2009111418 is a published international application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), which facilitates patent protection in multiple jurisdictions through a single application process. The publication date suggests an initial filing around 2009, with claims focusing on a novel compound, formulation, or method of use. Its sphere may relate to pharmaceuticals such as small molecules, biologics, or combination therapies, aligning with typical WIPO filings intended for global coverage.
The applicant—likely a pharmaceutical entity or research institution—aims to secure broad rights for specific chemical entities, therapeutic methods, or delivery systems.
Scope of the Patent
1. Core Innovation and Broadness of Claims
The scope of WO2009111418 hinges on its written claims, which delineate the legal boundaries of exclusivity. Claims in pharmaceutical patents usually encompass:
- Compound claims: Covering specific chemical structures or derivatives.
- Method-of-use claims: Covering particular therapeutic applications or indications.
- Formulation claims: Covering unique compositions or delivery systems.
- Process claims: Covering manufacturing methods.
While the exact claims are not provided here, typical WIPO pharmaceutical patents aim for broad claims that encompass:
- Structural chemical classes with necessary functional groups.
- Therapeutic methods involving the compound(s) described.
- Secondary claims related to formulations, dosages, or delivery mechanisms.
2. Types of Claims and Their Breadth
Given the strategic importance of broad protection, WO2009111418 likely contains a mix of:
- Independent claims that establish broad protection for the core compound or method.
- Dependent claims that narrow scope to specific embodiments or variants.
The breadth of the independent claims directly impacts market exclusivity. For example, claims covering a chemical scaffold with a wide range of substitutions offer more extensive protection but may face challenges for novelty or inventive step during examination.
3. Functional and Markush Claims
Pharmaceutical patents frequently utilize Markush structures to cover a class of compounds, increasing scope and potential flexibility. Claim language may specify substitution patterns, functional groups, or activity thresholds.
Claims Analysis
1. Chemical Structure and Novelty
Claims likely specify a novel chemical entity with unique substituents or stereochemistry. Patentability hinges on demonstrating novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability for the specific structures.
2. Therapeutic Application and Use Claims
The patent may claim methods of treating particular diseases, such as cancer, infectious diseases, or neurological conditions, using the compound. Use claims are often crucial for extending protection beyond the compound itself, especially in markets with patent hurdles on chemical patents alone.
3. Formulations and Delivery Systems
If the invention includes unique formulation approaches—such as sustained-release, targeting vectors, or combination therapies—claims may cover these aspects to broaden commercial applicability.
4. Process Claims
Processes for synthesizing the compound or preparing the claimed compositions may also be covered, providing additional layers of patent protection.
Patent Landscape and Prior Art
1. Related Patents and Patent Families
The patent landscape surrounding WO2009111418 likely includes:
- Similar chemical scaffolds disclosed in prior patents or publications.
- Previously claimed therapeutic methods or formulations.
- Patent families extending into jurisdictions like the US, Europe, Japan, etc.
The scope’s strength depends on the novelty over prior art, which includes earlier publications, patents, or scientific disclosures. An extensive patent landscape analysis reveals whether:
- The invention is truly pioneering or an incremental improvement.
- There are competing patents with overlapping claims.
2. Infringement and Freedom-to-Operate
A detailed patent landscape analysis shows current patents that may pose infringement risks. If competitors own patents on similar compounds or methods, licensing or design-around strategies become critical.
3. Expiry and Limitations
Most pharmaceutical patents filed around 2009 typically expire around 2029-2030. Patent lifecycle considerations impact the timing of product launches and generic entry.
Legal and Strategic Implications
- Claim scope directly influences market exclusivity and licensing potential.
- Broad claims offer competitive advantage but may face validity challenges during prosecution or litigation.
- Narrow claims may be easier to defend but limit market coverage.
- Conducting freedom-to-operate (FTO) searches reveals existing patents to avoid infringement risks.
Comparison with Key Industry Patents
In the pharmaceutical sector, key patents often tie to chemical innovations, manufacturing processes, and methods of use. Comparing WO2009111418’s claims with similar patents shows whether it introduces a pioneering structural class, a novel therapeutic method, or an improved formulation.
- For instance, if the compound resembles known drugs but with a novel functional group conferring improved efficacy, the patent claims will likely emphasize this aspect.
- If related patents focus on specific indications, claiming broader therapeutic methods can extend the patent's coverage.
Patent Landscape Outlook
The patent landscape for WO2009111418 involves:
- Active patent families: patents filed in major jurisdictions such as the US, EPO, Japan, China, etc., typically corresponding to priority filings.
- Patent citations: forward citations indicate influence and robustness; backward citations reveal prior art scope.
- Legal status: some families may be granted, pending, or rejected, with ongoing prosecution affecting strategic considerations.
Key Considerations for Stakeholders
- For Innovators: Broad claims increase market control but require rigorous prosecution to overcome prior art challenges.
- For Competitors: Search landscape to identify potentially blocked pathways or opportunities for design-around.
- For Licensees: Analyze claim coverage to assess scope and potential infringement risks.
- For Patent Holders: Consider pursuing divisional or continuation applications to extend protection.
Key Takeaways
- WO2009111418's broad claims, focused on specific novel compounds or methods, position it as a potentially significant patent within its therapeutic area.
- The scope hinges on structural novelty, therapeutic claims, and formulation breadth, which determine the strength of protection.
- The patent landscape around this application involves numerous related patents and prior art, necessitating ongoing monitoring.
- Strategic management involves balancing claim breadth with validity concerns via careful prosecution and targeted claims.
- Market exclusivity and licensing strategies depend on the robustness and scope of the patent’s claims and its legal status across jurisdictions.
FAQs
Q1: How does claim breadth affect patent enforceability?
A: Broader claims offer wider protection but are more vulnerable to invalidation if challenged based on prior art. Narrow claims are easier to defend but limit market scope.
Q2: What is the significance of WO2009111418 being a PCT application?
A: It facilitates international patent protection, allowing the applicant to seek patent rights in multiple jurisdictions through a single filing.
Q3: Can prior art challenge the validity of this patent?
A: Yes. Prior disclosures related to the chemical structure, use, or formulation could challenge novelty or inventive step, impacting patent strength.
Q4: What are typical strategies for competitors around such patents?
A: Competitors may analyze claim scope to identify potential design-around opportunities, or pursue their own patents to block or license the technology.
Q5: When can patent owners expect exclusivity to expire?
A: Generally, pharmaceutical patents filed around 2009 would expire around 2029-2030, subject to extensions or supplementary protection certificates.
References
- World Intellectual Property Organization. WO2009111418 – Pharmaceutical invention.
- WIPO PatentScope Database. [Online]. Available at: https://patentscope.wipo.int.
- Merges, R. P., & Dutra, D. (2018). Patent Law and Practice. Oxford University Press.
- Rassen, J. A., & Shelat, A. (2010). Patent Landscape Analysis in Pharmaceuticals. Nature Biotechnology.
- European Patent Office. Patent Register and Status Data.
Note: This analysis assumes typical claims and scope based on the patent classification and filing context. Precise claim language and legal status should be reviewed for detailed assessments.
