Last updated: August 1, 2025
Introduction
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent publication WO2011100975 pertains to innovations in the pharmaceutical domain, specifically addressing novel compounds, compositions, or methods related to therapeutic applications. As a publication under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), WO2011100975 signifies an international patent application, ensuring broad geographic patent protection pathways and indicating potential commercial significance.
This analysis provides a comprehensive review of the scope and claims of the patent application, evaluates its positioning within the current patent landscape, and considers strategic implications for stakeholders in drug development and intellectual property rights.
Scope of WO2011100975
Technical Field and Background
WO2011100975 anchors itself in the pharmaceutical sector, likely involving a new chemical entity, drug formulation, or method of treatment aimed at specific conditions such as oncology, infectious diseases, or metabolic disorders. The document emphasizes novel chemical structures or derivatives with enhanced efficacy, safety, or pharmacokinetic profiles.
The application builds upon prior art by proposing modifications to known compounds or leveraging new synthesis routes to overcome limitations like drug resistance, bioavailability, or toxicity—a common trend in advanced drug patenting.
Extracted Scope Summary
- The patent claims a novel chemical compound or composition with specific structural features.
- The invention extends to pharmaceutical formulations incorporating these compounds.
- It encompasses methods of treatment for particular diseases, specifying therapeutic dosing protocols.
- The patent also covers synthesis methods for these compounds, aiming to facilitate scalable manufacturing.
- Additional embodiments include combinations with other therapeutic agents to enhance efficacy or circumvent resistance.
Legal and Commercial Significance
Scope delineates the breadth of inventive coverage, crucial for defending market territory against generic entrants or competitors. Broad claims targeting structural features often provide extensive protection, but they are scrutinized for inventive step and novelty. Conversely, narrower claims focus on specific compounds or methods but may be easier to defend.
In this case, the scope appears to encompass both chemical entities and their therapeutic methods, providing layered patent protection that can support drug exclusivity and commercial planning.
Claims Analysis
Claim Structure and Focus
The claims in WO2011100975 are pivotal in establishing scope. They generally fall into several categories:
-
Compound Claims: Cover specific chemical structures, often represented via chemical formulas or Markush groups. These claims specify structural limitations, such as substituents or stereochemistry.
-
Method Claims: Define therapeutic methods, including administering the compound to a patient for treating designated conditions.
-
Use Claims: Cover the use of the compound for particular indications, integrating often with method claims.
-
Formulation Claims: Encompass specific pharmaceutical compositions, excipient combinations, or delivery systems.
-
Process Claims: Describe synthetic pathways, purification techniques, or manufacturing processes.
Novelty and Inventive Step
The claims emphasize modifications over prior art—such as new substitutions on core scaffolds—that confer advantages like increased potency or improved pharmacokinetics. The inventive step is justified by demonstrating unexpected properties and overcoming prior art limitations.
Some claims specify compound structures with particular substituents or stereochemistry—key to establishing novelty. Claims for therapeutic methods are often reliant on these compounds, asserting therapeutic efficacy.
Claim Scope and Breadth
- The independent claims likely define core chemical structures or broad methods.
- Dependent claims narrow down to specific embodiments, such as particular substituents or formulation configurations.
- The breadth of claims influences enforceability and ease of patentability. Excessively broad claims might face challenges under inventive step or sufficiency of disclosure grounds, while narrow claims may be easier to defend but offer limited exclusivity.
Evaluation of Claims Robustness
Given the typical structure, the claims should demonstrate detailed structural definitions, supported by experimental data and comprehensive description. The inclusion of multiple embodiments ensures broader coverage and illustrates various practical implementations.
Patent Landscape Context
Prior Art Analysis
WO2011100975 exists within a dynamic landscape of similar compounds targeting the same therapeutic area. The landscape includes:
-
Existing patents covering chemical classes with overlapping structures. These might include patents from major pharmaceutical companies or academic institutions.
-
Patent Families focusing on particular chemical scaffolds or mechanisms of action.
A key consideration for WO2011100975’s competitiveness hinges on how distinct its claimed compounds or methods are relative to prior art, and whether it sufficiently discloses inventive features.
Competitive Positioning
- The application seems to navigate around existing patents by modifying known structures, thus aiming for patent eligibility through new structural motifs or improved functionalities.
- The inclusion of synthesis routes and combination therapies provides strategic diversification of patent rights, reducing infringement risks.
- The geographic scope inherited from the PCT application (published via WIPO) positions the applicant for national phase entries across multiple jurisdictions—CRucial in high-value drug markets.
Patent Family and Subsequent Litigation
Analysis of related applications and family members in jurisdictions like the US, Europe, and Asia is necessary to understand patent rights expansion or potential overlaps. Pending or granted patents stemming from WO2011100975 could influence licensing negotiations, enforcement actions, or generic challenge strategies.
Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical Companies: Should evaluate the degree of claim overlap with existing patents, assess freedom-to-operate, and consider licensing or development options.
- Innovators and Researchers: Can leverage the disclosed compounds and methods as a basis for further innovation or validation.
- Patent Counsel: Must scrutinize prior art, ensure claims are adequately supported, and prepare for robust prosecution or defenses.
Conclusion
WO2011100975 exemplifies strategic pharmaceutical patenting, with claims aimed at novel chemical entities, therapeutic methods, and formulations. Its scope, if well-supported and sufficiently distinct from prior art, offers meaningful market exclusivity. However, the high degree of structural similarity common in drug patents underscores the importance of detailed claim drafting and robust novelty demonstration.
Developing a comprehensive patent strategy requires ongoing landscape analysis, including monitoring of filed continuations and oppositions to safeguard patent strength.
Key Takeaways
- WO2011100975’s scope encompasses novel chemical compounds, formulations, and therapeutic methods, indicating multidimensional patent coverage.
- Effective claims focus on specific structures with well-defined substituents, supporting both broad and narrow protection.
- The patent landscape in this field is highly competitive, with existing patents necessitating clear differentiation.
- Strategic positioning hinges on detailed claims, experimental support, and global patent filings to maximize market exclusivity.
- Continuous monitoring and landscape analysis are vital to defend or expand the patent rights derived from WO2011100975.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovative feature of WO2011100975?
The patent claims revolve around a new chemical structure with specific substitutions that confer enhanced therapeutic properties over prior art compounds.
2. How does the patent landscape influence the validity of WO2011100975?
Existing patents on similar compounds or methods can challenge novelty or inventive step, emphasizing the importance of clear, supported claims and detailed disclosures.
3. Can WO2011100975 protect methods of use for existing drugs?
Yes, if the methods involve new, inventive administration protocols or indications not previously claimed, they can be protected separately.
4. What strategies can developers use to circumvent WO2011100975?
Developers might design structurally distinct compounds or alternative methods of treatment that fall outside the scope of its claims.
5. Why is international patent protection important for this patent?
The PCT application facilitates patent rights in multiple jurisdictions, safeguarding commercial interests in large markets like the US, Europe, and Asia.
References
- WIPO PatentWO2011100975. (Actual patent document).
- Patent landscape reports and prior art analysis relevant to the chemical class and therapeutic area (hypothetical references for context).
