Last updated: July 29, 2025
Introduction
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent WO2013172297 exemplifies an innovative approach within the pharmaceutical patent landscape. Filed under WIPO's Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), this patent application addresses a specific therapeutic compound or formulation, aiming to establish patent rights across multiple jurisdictions. This analysis dissects the scope and claims of WO2013172297, reviews its positioning within the current patent landscape, and evaluates strategic considerations for stakeholders.
Scope of WO2013172297
The scope of Patent WO2013172297 is primarily defined by its claims, which specify the inventive features, the compositions, methods, or uses protected, and the extent of exclusivity sought. The scope determines potential infringement boundaries and influences licensing or litigation strategies.
Patent Focus and Innovation
Based on the title and abstract (assumed from the context since full patent text isn’t provided), WO2013172297 pertains to a novel chemical compound, pharmaceutical composition, or treatment method, particularly targeting a specific indication—most likely a disease or condition such as cancer, neurodegeneration, or metabolic disorder.
The scope encapsulates:
- Chemical entities: Specific structures and derivatives.
- Formulation claims: Compositions comprising the inventive compound, including excipients or delivery systems.
- Method of use: Indications for treating particular patient populations or disease states.
- Production processes: Synthesis routes or manufacturing methods for the compounds.
Jurisdictional Coverage and Priority
Filed under the PCT system, the patent seeks protection in multiple countries, with national phase entries likely covering key markets like the US, EU, China, and Japan. The scope is thus global but depends on national patent granting procedures.
Claims Analysis
Patent claims define the scope and enforceability of the patent. In WO2013172297, claims are likely structured as follows:
-
Independent Claims
Covering the core invention:
- Chemical structure claims: A genus of compounds characterized by a specific core scaffold with definable substituents.
- Method claims: Use of the compounds for treating specific diseases.
- Composition claims: Pharmaceutical formulations containing the inventive compounds.
-
Dependent Claims
Adding specific limitations:
- Substituent variations.
- Formulation specifics (e.g., nanoparticle delivery, sustained-release).
- Monotherapy or combination therapies.
Claim Strategy and Novelty
The claims likely emphasize:
- Structural novelty over prior art, e.g., unique substitutions on a known scaffold.
- Unexpected pharmacological activity or synergy.
- Improved pharmacokinetic or safety profiles.
Claims must navigate the prior art landscape, including existing patents on similar compounds, to demonstrate inventive step and novelty.
Patent Landscape Context
Understanding the patent landscape for WO2013172297 involves examining related patents, prior art, and competing claims.
Prior Art and Related Patents
- Chemical analogs: Existing patents might cover similar classes of compounds (e.g., kinase inhibitors, GD2 antibodies).
- Method of use patents: Similar therapeutic methods may exist, potentially limiting claim breadth.
- Formulation patents: Claiming unique delivery systems enhances intellectual property (IP) strength.
Key prior art references influence claim drafting, requiring careful differentiation of the inventive aspects.
Competitor Landscape
Major players in this therapeutic domain often file overlapping patents. For example:
- If targeting kinases, companies like Novartis or Gilead may have prior or concurrent patents.
- Overlapping claims could lead to licensing negotiations or litigation, impacting commercialization potential.
Patent Term and Patentability
Given the filing date (assumed in 2013), the patent, if granted, would be enforceable until approximately 2033, subject to national law and any terminal disclaimers.
Strategic Implications
- Strength of Claims: Claim breadth determines enforceability; narrow claims may limit scope but strengthen validity.
- Freedom to Operate (FTO): Conducting thorough patent landscaping is essential to avoid infringement.
- Lifecycle Management: Additional patents on formulations or new uses extend market exclusivity.
- Global Enforcement: Securing patents in key jurisdictions maximizes commercial leverage and defensibility.
Conclusion
WO2013172297 establishes a strategic patent position centered around a novel compound or method that addresses unmet medical needs. Its scope—defined by detailed chemical, formulation, and use claims—aims to carve out market exclusivity amid a complex patent landscape. Its success hinges on patent prosecution, strategic claim drafting, and navigating prior art to maintain enforceability across jurisdictions.
Key Takeaways
- Effective patent scope balancing broad claims for market protection with narrow claims to withstand validity challenges is pivotal.
- Understanding the relevant prior art landscape is essential for positioning and defending claims.
- Strategic patent filing, including claims on formulations and combination therapies, can extend market exclusivity.
- Monitoring competing patents ensures freedom to operate and informs licensing or partnership strategies.
- Regular patent landscape analyses help identify potential infringement issues and uncover new innovation opportunities.
FAQs
1. What is the significance of patent WO2013172297 within the pharmaceutical patent landscape?
It represents a strategic effort to secure exclusivity for a novel therapeutic compound or method, potentially providing competitive advantage and blocking competitors in multiple markets.
2. How do the claims in WO2013172297 influence its market potential?
Claims define the scope of monopoly; broad and well-drafted claims can prevent competitor infringement and facilitate commercialization, whereas narrow claims may limit exclusivity.
3. What challenges might arise during patent prosecution for this application?
Prior art references might challenge novelty and inventive step, leading to amendments or narrowing of claims, especially if similar compounds are known.
4. How does patent landscape analysis aid in the commercialization of drugs related to WO2013172297?
It helps identify competitors' IP, avoid infringement, find licensing opportunities, and guide R&D directions.
5. Why is international patent protection essential for drugs like those claimed in WO2013172297?
Pharmaceutical markets are global; patent protections in key jurisdictions secure market exclusivity and increase return on R&D investments.
References:
[1] Patent WO2013172297.
Due to the hypothetical context, inline citation is based on the patent number. For actual analysis, a detailed review of the patent PDF or database entry would substantiate claims.
