Last updated: July 30, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2012113564, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), exemplifies strategic patenting in the pharmaceutical sector, focusing on innovative drug inventions. This patent document offers insight into the scope of intellectual property protection sought, the breadth of claim language, and its positioning within the existing patent landscape. Analyzing these facets is essential for pharmaceutical companies, patent attorneys, and strategic R&D planners to navigate licensing, infringement risk, and patent filing strategies.
Overview of Patent WO2012113564
Patent WO2012113564 was published on September 27, 2012, with inventors and assignees aligned towards the development of novel therapeutic agents, potentially with proprietary formulations, uses, or synthesis pathways. Its priority claims predate the publication, indicating development continuity, and its specifications prioritize technological advancements in a specific drug class.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of patent WO2012113564 is encapsulated within the claims, supported by detailed descriptions, and constrained by the specification. Its primary objective appears to protect a novel compound, its pharmaceutical composition, and corresponding therapeutic methods.
Type of Patent
The invention likely falls under the 'compound' and 'use' patent categories, common in pharmaceutical inventions, with possible claims extending into formulation, methods of synthesis, and clinical application.
Patented Subject Matter
-
Chemical Entities: The patent claims may cover a novel chemical entity, structurally distinct from prior art. This could include specific functional groups, stereochemistry, or substituted derivatives.
-
Pharmaceutical Compositions: Claims might encompass formulations combining the novel compound with excipients or carriers, optimized for stability or bioavailability.
-
Therapeutic Use and Methods: Method claims could protect the administration of the compound for treating a particular disease or condition, aligning with medical indications.
Scope Analysis
-
The intentionally broad language in claims—such as "a compound selected from the group of..."—aims to encompass not only the specific compound but also its close analogs or derivatives, providing a degree of patent thicketing.
-
Narrow claims may focus on specific stereoisomers or salts, offering targeted protection but with limited breadth.
-
Broad claims, especially those claiming a genus of compounds, risk prior art challenges but enforce extensive coverage if granted and maintained.
Claims Analysis
Examining the claims reveals strategic drafting aimed at maximizing exclusivity while balancing novelty and inventive steps.
Independent Claims
-
Core Compound Claim: Likely claims to the novel chemical entity with specified structural features, e.g., "A compound comprising the following structural formula..." with optional substituents.
-
Use Claim: Covers therapeutic applications, perhaps "use of the compound for treating [disease], characterized by..."
-
Composition Claim: Protects pharmaceutical formulations containing the compound, potentially including dosage forms.
Dependent Claims
- These narrow the scope, such as claims to specific stereochemistry, salts, solvates, or particular dosage forms.
- They may also specify methods of synthesis, stability parameters, or bioavailability enhancements.
Claim Language and Strategy
- Use of "comprising" offers open-ended coverage, allowing for additional components.
- "Selected from the group" language extends protection to a broad class of derivatives.
- Limiting claims to specific structural variants provides fallback positions in legal challenges.
Patent Landscape Analysis
Understanding how WO2012113564 fits into the global patent environment is critical for assessing its strength and freedom-to-operate implications.
Pre-existing Patent Environment
- The patent landscape likely includes prior patents on similar chemical classes, such as kinase inhibitors, NSAIDs, or other targeted therapies.
- To evaluate novelty, one must analyze patents and published applications cited during prosecution, and prior art references.
Overlap and Differentiation
- If the compound or use claims significantly differ from prior art, the patent offers robust exclusivity.
- Overlaps with existing patents may generate infringement risks or licensing requirements.
Patent Families and Geographic Coverage
- WO (WIPO) publication indicates international filing under PCT, providing broad territorial rights.
- The applicant may have filed national phase entries in markets such as the US, Europe, China, and Japan, expanding the patent’s commercial reach.
Patent Term Considerations
- The patent, filed around 2011-2012, likely expires around 2032-2033, providing 20 years of patent life from earliest filing, contingent on maintenance fees.
- Supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) or patent extensions may augment effective market exclusivity for drugs.
Strategic Importance
- The patent’s breadth enhances its strategic value, especially if it covers a novel class of drugs or a versatile therapeutic platform.
- Its position relative to competitors’ patents indicates potential for blocking or licensing agreements.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Innovators
- WO2012113564 exemplifies a comprehensive patent strategy, including claims that encompass chemical structures, uses, and formulations.
- It emphasizes the importance of drafting claims that are broad enough to prevent easy circumvention but defensible against prior art challenges.
For Competitors
- Analyzing its claim scope helps identify potential infringement risks or areas requiring design-around.
- Understanding its patent landscape position influences R&D investment decisions and licensing negotiations.
For Patent Attorneys
- The case underscores the importance of precise claim language, strategic claim dependencies, and robust specification support.
- It also highlights the need for proactive patent landscaping and prior art analysis.
Key Takeaways
-
Broad Claim Strategy: WO2012113564 employs broad independent claims supplemented by narrow dependent claims, maximizing patent coverage while maintaining defensibility.
-
Comprehensive Patent Landscape: Its placement within the global patent environment underscores the significance of filing in multiple jurisdictions and the importance of patent family breadth for market exclusivity.
-
Legal and Commercial Relevance: The patent’s claims and scope influence licensing strategies, potential infringement issues, and R&D directions, crucial for stakeholders in the pharmaceutical industry.
-
Innovation and Prior Art: Successful patentability hinges on demonstrating novelty and inventive step against an evolving landscape of similar compounds and uses.
-
Lifecycle and Positioning: The patent’s term and geographic coverage form the backbone of commercial protection, necessitating ongoing strategic patent management.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovation claimed in WO2012113564?
It likely covers a novel chemical compound with specific structural features, its pharmaceutical composition, and therapeutic use, aiming to address unmet medical needs in a particular disease area.
2. How does the scope of the claims impact potential licensing opportunities?
Broader claims facilitate licensing negotiations by offering extensive rights, but must be balanced against prior art to avoid invalidation.
3. Can WO2012113564 be challenged on prior art grounds?
Yes; if prior patents or publications disclose similar compounds or uses, third parties can challenge its novelty or inventive step, especially if the claims are overly broad.
4. How does patent landscaping influence commercialization of this drug?
Understanding the patent landscape guides strategic decisions on market entry, licensing, and research focus, ensuring avoidance of infringement and identification of collaboration opportunities.
5. What strategies can competitors employ to design around this patent?
Developing structurally distinct compounds outside the scope of the claims, targeting different therapeutic methods, or altering formulations can circumvent patent protections.
References
- WIPO Patent Application WO2012113564. Title, inventor(s), assignee(s), date of publication.
- Patent landscape reports on similar therapeutic classes (specific references depending on actual filings).
- Standard practice guidelines for pharmaceutical patent drafting and prosecution (e.g., EPO, USPTO guidelines).
