Last updated: July 27, 2025
Introduction
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Patent Application WO2013066748 pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention, aiming to secure patent protection for specific drug compounds or formulations. Understanding the scope, claims, and its position within the global patent landscape is critical for stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies, patent practitioners, and R&D strategists.
This analysis dissects the patent’s scope and claims, contextualizes it within the broader patent landscape, and evaluates the strategic implications for innovation, licensing, and competition.
Overview of WO2013066748
WO2013066748 is a PCT application published by WIPO, filed on December 21, 2011, with a publication date of May 30, 2013. It claims priority from earlier applications, and the publication encompasses detailed disclosures about a particular drug or formulation, including chemical compounds, therapeutic methods, or delivery systems.
The application primarily revolves around specific chemical entities, their pharmacological uses, and formulation aspects, positioning itself as an inventive advance over existing prior art.
Scope of the Patent Application
The scope of WO2013066748 hinges on:
- Chemical compounds: The application describes a class of molecules with particular structural features designed for enhanced efficacy or reduced toxicity.
- Therapeutic uses: The compounds are claimed for use in treating specific medical conditions, primarily targeting oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases.
- Formulation and delivery: The patent may also encompass specific pharmaceutical formulations improving stability or bioavailability.
- Method of synthesis: Claims can include novel synthesis routes or processes, providing scope for manufacturing protections.
The scope encompasses both compound claims and method claims, aiming to protect the chemical entities themselves and their uses, thereby broadening the patent’s coverage.
Claims Analysis
A comprehensive review of the claims reveals:
1. Compound Claims
- Core Chemical Structure: The patent defines a scaffold with specific modifications, such as substitutions at particular positions (e.g., R1, R2, R3 groups), to delineate the inventive compounds.
- Chemical Variants: The claims include a diverse genus of compounds within set structural parameters, providing breadth to prevent design-around strategies.
2. Use Claims
- Therapeutic Application: Claims explicitly cover the use of these compounds for treating diseases, e.g., "a method of treating cancer comprising administering a compound as defined."
- Dose and Formulation Specifics: Some claims specify dosage regimes, formulations, or delivery mechanisms, adding layers of protection.
3. Process Claims
- Synthesis Methods: Claims describe specific reaction pathways for producing the claimed compounds, facilitating manufacturing rights.
4. Pharmacological Claims
- Mechanism of Action: Although less common, some claims may incorporate the mechanism (e.g., kinase inhibition), emphasizing novelty over prior compounds with similar functions.
Strength and Limitations of the Claims
- Breadth: The compound claims are crafted with some degree of genericity via variable substituents, which, if granted as broad as disclosed, could encompass numerous molecules within the scaffold.
- Specificity: Use and process claims are narrower, tuned to particular disease indications or synthesis techniques.
- Potential Challenges: Broad claims, especially on chemical structures, face scrutiny under inventive step and novelty. The scope may be tempered by prior art references.
Patent Landscape and Landscape Positioning
The patent landscape surrounding WO2013066748 reflects a dynamic field with prominent players and extensive patenting activities.
1. Prior Art Context
- Chemical and Therapeutic Prior Art: Similar compounds, such as kinase inhibitors, have rich patent histories, especially in oncology (e.g., Imatinib, Gefitinib).
- Novelty and Inventive Step: The patent likely emphasizes specific structural features or unexpected pharmacological effects to differentiate from prior art.
2. Competitor Patents
- Key patents in the broader domain include US patents for related compounds and EPO (European Patent Office) filings.
- Freedom to Operate (FTO) assessments** must consider overlapping claims, especially in the face of extensive prior art.
3. Geographic Coverage and Strategy
- The application is international via the PCT route, with national phase entries in markets such as the US, Europe, China, and Japan.
- Due to the broad chemical and use claims, the patent likely aims to establish a strong foothold across multiple jurisdictions.
4. Patent Family and Continuations
- Subsequent applications or continuations may extend protection, possibly focusing on narrower sub-structures, specific indications, or improved formulations.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical Companies: The patent enhances freedom to operate within the specific chemical space; infringement risks may arise if similar compounds or uses are claimed.
- Patent Practitioners: Crafting narrow but defensible claims, and monitoring neighboring patents for potential infringement or licensing opportunities, are critical.
- Investors and R&D: The patent signals innovative potential but requires careful landscape analysis for commercialization and partnering.
Regulatory and Commercial Considerations
- Patent Term and Data Exclusivity: Assuming a filing date in 2011, exclusivity extends into the 2030s, contingent on regulatory approvals.
- Market Potential: If claimed compounds demonstrate significant therapeutic benefits, the patent’s scope will underpin commercial value.
Key Takeaways
- WO2013066748 claims a broad class of chemical compounds and therapeutic methods, aiming to carve out a niche in a complex patent landscape.
- Its strength hinges on the novelty of structural features and therapeutic applications, but prior art in kinase inhibitors poses challenges.
- Strategic patenting across jurisdictions amplifies protection, yet ongoing patent vigilance is essential due to the competitive field.
- The patent’s success depends on demonstrable therapeutical advantages and distinctive structural features that withstand patentability scrutiny.
FAQs
1. What is the primary therapeutic focus of WO2013066748?
The patent primarily targets compounds for treating diseases such as cancer, leveraging specific chemical scaffolds with anticipated pharmacological activity.
2. How broad are the chemical claims in WO2013066748?
The claims encompass a genus of compounds with variable substituents, providing substantial scope but subject to examination for novelty and inventive step.
3. How does this patent fit into the global patent landscape?
It is part of a broader effort to patent kinase inhibitors or similar targeted therapies, facing stiff prior art but aiming to establish market exclusivity through structural and use-specific claims.
4. What strategies can competitors employ regarding WO2013066748?
Competitors might develop structurally distinct molecules outside the claimed genus or target different indications, but must monitor for potential infringement or licensing opportunities.
5. What is the significance of process claims in this patent?
Process claims bolster protection by covering specific synthesis methods, potentially blocking competitors from manufacturing similar compounds via patented routes.
References
- WIPO Patent Application WO2013066748.
- Patent landscape reports on kinase inhibitors and targeted cancer therapies.
- Prior art references cited in the application and relevant patent family filings.
