Last updated: August 5, 2025
Introduction
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent WO2013166408 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention, offering potential therapeutic or diagnostic utility. As a published patent application, it provides insights into the scope of protection sought, the specific claims delineating enforceable rights, and the broader patent landscape shaped by precedents, related patents, and technological trends. This analysis unpacks these aspects, providing a strategic understanding relevant for industry stakeholders, including patent attorneys, R&D entities, and business strategists.
Scope of the WIPO Patent Application WO2013166408
WO2013166408 is a patent application filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), published in 2013, focusing on a novel drug-related invention. Although the full specification details are accessible via the WIPO database, the core scope centers on a specific class of compounds and their therapeutic applications, potentially targeting a particular disease or pathway.
The scope encompasses:
-
Chemical Entities: The application claims a group of compounds characterized by specific structural features. These compounds may include derivatives, analogs, or conjugates designed for enhanced activity or reduced toxicity.
-
Methodologies: The patent discusses methods for synthesizing these compounds, potentially including novel synthetic routes that improve yield, purity, or scalability.
-
Therapeutic Use: The claims extend to therapeutic applications—indicative of use in treating specific diseases, conditions, or target pathways. Such treatment claims are typical in pharmaceutical patents, aiming to cover both the compounds themselves and their medical use.
-
Diagnostic or Biomarker Utility: In some instances, the scope may also include diagnostic applications if the invention pertains to biomarkers or diagnostic assays.
Overall, the scope indicates a comprehensive approach encompassing chemical invention, manufacturing process, and medical application, aligned with typical drug patents.
Claims Analysis
The claims define the legal boundaries of the patent rights. In WO2013166408, the claims can be broadly categorized into:
1. Compound Claims
These specify the chemical structure — often represented by Markush groups to encompass variations — and set the foundation for the patent’s exclusive rights.
- Structural Limitations: Claims specify core scaffolds, substituent groups, stereochemistry, and functional groups designed to distinguish the invention from prior art.
- Scope of Variations: Use of Markush formulas allows claiming a broad range of derivatives, maximizing coverage over chemical space.
- Preferred Embodiments: Claims may highlight specific compounds with optimized activity or pharmacokinetic profiles, often supported by experimental data.
2. Process Claims
- Synthesis Methods: Claims detail particular routes for preparing the compounds, including reagents, reaction conditions, and intermediates. Novel synthetic steps can heighten inventive step and patentability.
- Purification & Formulation: Some claims extend to formulations or delivery systems if they improve stability, bioavailability, or targeted delivery.
3. Use / Method of Treatment Claims
- Therapeutic Methods: Cover methods of administering the compounds for treating specific diseases, often phrased as "a method of treating [disease] comprising administering [compound]".
- Diagnostic Utility: If present, claims cover methods for diagnosing conditions using the compounds or related biomarkers.
4. Combination and Composition Claims
- Compositions: The patent might claim pharmaceutical compositions comprising the compounds and excipients.
- Combination Therapy: Claims could extend to combined treatment involving the compounds and other therapeutic agents.
Claim Strategy Implication: The breadth and number of claims influence the scope of enforceability. Broad compound claims provide initial strong coverage but may face prior art challenges, whereas narrower claims protect specific embodiments.
Patent Landscape Context
Understanding the patent landscape around WO2013166408 involves several dimensions:
1. Prior Art and Novelty
- The inventiveness hinges on distinguishing the compounds and methods from existing art. Prior art includes previous patents, scientific publications, and known synthesis routes.
- Patent search reveals prior patents on similar chemical classes or therapeutic targets—indicating the inventive step may rest on unique structural features or innovative synthetic approaches.
2. Related Patents and Patent Families
- Communication with patent databases (e.g., Espacenet, Lens, WIPO PATENTSCOPE) uncovers potential patent families filed in key jurisdictions—U.S., Europe, China—that expand the geographical scope.
- Related applications or granted patents might focus on similar chemical scaffolds, target indications, or manufacturing methods, forming a crowded landscape.
3. Patent Trends and Filing Strategies
- The 2013 publication date suggests active research around that period in the targeted therapeutic area.
- Companies or universities likely filed subsequent patents for improvements, formulations, or new indications—evidence of ongoing innovation pipelines.
4. Patent Challenges and Freedom-to-Operate (FTO)
- The broadness of claims and prior art proximity can induce patent challenges, including potential invalidation or licensing negotiations.
- FTO assessments in jurisdictions with dense patent clusters are essential before commercial development.
Legal and Commercial Implications
-
Patent Strength: The pharmaceutical patent's enforceability depends on its novelty, non-obviousness, and sufficient disclosure.
-
Scope of Protection: Broad compound claims offer substantial exclusivity; narrow claims mitigate invalidation risks but limit coverage.
-
Global Strategy: Filing in major markets through national phase entries ensures strategic protection aligned with international commercialization plans.
-
Licensing Opportunities: If the patent covers promising compounds, it becomes a licensing asset for other developers, especially if the patent owner chooses to negotiate or enforce rights.
Conclusion
WO2013166408 exemplifies a comprehensive pharmaceutical patent application, targeting specific chemical entities along with their synthesis and therapeutic use. Its claims are structured to maximize protective breadth, while the patent landscape indicates a competitive environment with prior art and related filings. Stakeholders must evaluate the patent’s scope relative to existing patents, assess validity, and strategize around potential licensing or infringement risks.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s scope includes novel chemical compounds, their synthesis methods, and therapeutic applications, offering robust protection across multiple dimensions.
- Drafting of claims employs broad chemical Markush structures, yet must balance novelty and non-obviousness considerations versus prior art.
- The existing patent landscape is competitive, with related filings in key jurisdictions that could influence enforcement or licensing strategies.
- A thorough Freedom-to-Operate analysis is necessary before commercialization to mitigate infringement risks.
- Ongoing innovation remains critical, as subsequent filings may refine, narrow, or expand the patent estate.
FAQs
Q1: What makes the claims in WO2013166408 broad or narrow?
The breadth depends on the chemical scope defined by Markush structures and the specific language used in process and use claims. Broader claims cover more derivatives but risk invalidation, while narrower claims are more defensible but offer limited protection.
Q2: How does the patent landscape influence strategic drug development?
A dense patent landscape can restrict freedom to operate, necessitating licensing or designing around existing patents. Conversely, strong patents provide exclusivity driving investment.
Q3: Can synthesis methods claimed in WO2013166408 be independently patentable?
Yes, if the methods are novel and non-obvious, they can be separately patented, further extending protection.
Q4: How critical is geographic coverage for this patent?
Extensive geographic coverage ensures global exclusivity, which is vital for pharmaceutical commercialization, especially in large markets like the US, EU, and China.
Q5: What are the next steps for a company interested in this patent?
Perform a detailed patent clearance search, evaluate patent validity and scope, consider licensing or designing around, and monitor subsequent patent filings for ongoing innovation.
References
[1] WIPO Patent WO2013166408 - Full document available via WIPO PATENTSCOPE.
[2] Espacenet patent database.
[3] Patent landscape reports and industry publications on pharmaceutical chemical patents.
