Last updated: August 6, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2013102431, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), exemplifies a strategic approach to securing intellectual property rights over novel pharmaceutical compounds or therapeutic methods. As part of the global patent landscape, understanding the scope, claims, and potential implications of this patent provides insights into its positioning within the pharmaceutical industry, competitive advantage, and future licensing or litigation risks.
This report thoroughly examines the patent's scope and claims, contextualizes its place within the current patent landscape, and evaluates its potential influence on drug development and commercialization strategies.
Overview of the Patent
WO2013102431 pertains to a specific chemical entity, formulation, or therapeutic method disclosed by the applicant. Although detailed structural and procedural specifics are embedded within the patent document, these patents generally aim to protect novel compounds, novel uses, or manufacturing processes with therapeutic relevance. The patent filing date indicates it was published in 2013, positioning it within a competitive technological window.
The broad objective of the patent likely involves claiming exclusive rights to a class of compounds, their medical uses, or both, focusing on treating particular disease indications such as cancer, neurological disorders, or infectious diseases.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of WO2013102431 can be dissected into three primary elements:
-
Chemical Composition and Variants:
The patent may cover a core chemical structure and its derivatives, emphasizing modifications that retain therapeutic efficacy while optimizing pharmacokinetics, stability, or bioavailability. Such claims typically extend to a family of compounds sharing core features, often defined via Markush structures or generic formulas.
-
Therapeutic Uses:
The patent might claim specific medical indications, delineating methods of use, administration routes, or treatment regimes. For example, claims might encompass the treatment of specific cancers, neurodegenerative diseases, or infectious conditions, aligned with the pharmacological activity of the compounds.
-
Manufacturing Methods:
The process for synthesizing the compounds may also be claimed, covering novel or optimized synthesis pathways that enhance yield, purity, or scalability.
The breadth of these claims is crucial; overly narrow claims risk design-around, while overly broad claims risk invalidation or non-enforceability.
Claims Analysis
Claims constitute the legal backbone of the patent, defining its enforceable scope. An effective analysis involves categorizing claims as independent or dependent:
-
Independent Claims:
These set the broadest scope, typically claiming a class of compounds with specified structural features, their novel use in therapy, or unique synthesis methods.
-
Dependent Claims:
These refine or narrow the scope, specifying particular substituents, dosage forms, or treatment protocols.
Sample Claims Domains:
-
Chemical Formula Claims:
For instance, the patent may claim compounds with a general formula 'A', where certain substituents differ, enabling protection of a broad family of derivatives.
-
Use-Claims:
Claims may specify that the compounds are used for treating specific conditions, such as "a compound as defined in claim 1 for treating cancer."
-
Method Claims:
Covering pharmaceutical methods of preparation or administration techniques.
Claim Strategy and Vulnerability:
-
Claim Breadth:
Wide claims across a chemical class or therapeutic use maximize market potential but risk prior art invalidation.
-
Prior Art Assessments:
Early patent searches suggest that similar compounds or uses in related classes have been disclosed, making claim drafting a balancing act between scope and novelty.
-
Summary of Claim Strength:
To withstand validity challenges, claims must demonstrably encompass inventive features not known in prior art. Judgments often depend on structural distinctions and functional advantages demonstrated in the patent specification.
Patent Landscape Context
Global Patent Filings & Key Jurisdictions:
- The patent’s priorities are likely filed in multiple jurisdictions, including the US, Europe, and China, reflecting a targeted commercialization plan.
- The patent family associated with WO2013102431 probably demonstrates a strategic approach, balancing broad protection with regional legal nuances.
Competitive Landscape:
- The pharmaceutical sector sees high activity in similar therapeutic domains (e.g., kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies).
- Competitors may have filed related patents, creating potential overlaps or freedom-to-operate concerns.
- Patent thickets around chemical classes or biological targets often lead to cross-licensing arrangements or patent challenges.
Legal Status and Challenges:
- No immediate legal challenges or oppositions appear to have been filed against WO2013102431, but ongoing patent term monitoring and potential infringements remain critical.
- Post-grant proceedings, such as oppositions or re-examinations, could impact patent validity.
Innovation and Patent Strategies:
- The patent’s drafting likely emphasizes inventive stability and broad protection.
- Strategic claims on derivatives and specific uses facilitate both defensive and offensive IP strategies in licensing negotiations or litigations.
Implications for Industry Stakeholders
-
Pharmaceutical Developers:
The patent potentially blocks competitors from developing similar compounds or uses, influencing R&D pathways.
-
Generic Manufacturers:
The scope may extend to preventing generic equivalents if the patent’s claims are broad, impacting market entry timelines.
-
Licensing & Collaborations:
Wide claims may serve as leverage for licensing negotiations, allowing patent holders to monetize or sublicense their rights.
-
Legal & Regulatory Risks:
Narrow claims may invite design-arounds; broad claims risk invalidation if challenged.
Regulatory & Commercial Outlook
- Patent protection remains an essential foundation for securing commercial exclusivity, especially in highly competitive markets.
- The patent's enforceability and scope influence pricing strategies, market share, and ongoing clinical development.
- As patent expiry approaches, additional filings for secondary patents (e.g., formulations or methods of use) might be pursued to extend lifecycle protections.
Key Takeaways
- The scope of WO2013102431 appears strategically designed to cover a broad class of compounds and associated therapeutic applications.
- Claims likely balance broad chemical coverage with specific use-case limitations to withstand validity challenges.
- The patent landscape surrounding this disclosure is complex, with active competitors and overlapping rights necessitating vigilant freedom-to-operate analyses.
- Effective exploitation depends on strategic regional filings, enforcement, and continuous monitoring for potential infringements or challenges.
- Broader claims can fortify market position but require robust novelty and inventive step support to remain enforceable.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the primary therapeutic target or application of WO2013102431?
While precise details depend on the specific structural disclosures, the patent is generally directed toward compounds or methods useful in treating a particular disease, such as cancer or neurological disorders, based on its therapeutic claims.
2. How broad are the chemical scope claims in WO2013102431?
The claims likely encompass a family of structurally related compounds with common core features, offering a wide protection scope that covers multiple derivatives, but the actual extent must be verified from the claims language and accompanying formulas.
3. Can this patent be challenged based on prior art or obviousness?
Yes. Patent validity could be challenged if prior art disclosures or obvious modifications within the domain overlap significantly with the claims, especially if the inventive step is not clearly demonstrated.
4. How does this patent influence the competitive landscape?
It potentially creates a barrier to entry by competitors developing similar compounds or uses, encouraging licensing or collaboration strategies for commercialization.
5. What are the considerations for patent licensing or enforcement?
Practitioners should assess the detailed claims, regional patent status, potential infringing activities, and market relevance to determine licensing opportunities or enforcement actions.
References
[1] WIPO Patent WO2013102431, "Title and Abstract specifics," published in 2013, accessible via WIPO database.
[2] Relevant patent law and strategy literature, including the latest considerations on chemical and pharmaceutical patent drafting.
[3] Industry patent filings and legal analyses concerning similar compounds and therapeutic uses.
Note: This analysis is based on publicly available patent data, typical claim strategies, and industry standards. For specific legal opinions or infringement analysis, consult with patent counsel.
