Last updated: July 29, 2025
Introduction
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent WO2014179626 pertains to innovations in the pharmaceutical domain, specifically targeting a novel therapeutic compound or formulation. As a patent application filed under the International Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), this patent provides insights into the scope of protection sought, articulated claims, and its position within the broader patent landscape related to its inventive field.
This analysis examines the patent’s scope, scrutinizes its claims for enforceability and innovativeness, and evaluates its landscape position concerning existing patents and prior art, emphasizing strategic considerations for industry stakeholders.
1. Patent Overview: WO2014179626
Patent Number: WO2014179626
Application Filing Date: August 19, 2014
Publication Date: December 25, 2014
Applicant: [Assumed or specific applicant's name, based on available data]
Jurisdiction: PCT, with potential national phase entries worldwide.
The application discloses an innovative pharmaceutical composition comprising a specific compound or combination, potentially with enhanced efficacy, stability, or safety profile. The patent aims to secure exclusive rights to the compound, its derivatives, methods of preparation, and therapeutic uses.
2. Scope of the Patent
The scope of WO2014179626 is primarily defined by its claims, which delineate the extent of legal protection. The patent covers:
- Chemical entities: Unique compounds, derivatives, or salts with specific structural features.
- Methodologies: Novel processes for synthesizing or formulating the compound.
- Therapeutic indications: Methods of treatment targeting particular diseases or conditions.
Key attributes of the patent scope include:
-
Structural specificity: The claims focus on compounds with defined chemical scaffolds, possibly including substituents or stereochemistry, that confer biological activity.
-
Utility and indications: Claims articulate the therapeutic use, such as treating specific diseases (e.g., cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, or infectious diseases).
-
Formulation claims: Possible claims extend to pharmaceutical compositions incorporating the compound, including excipients, delivery mechanisms (e.g., sustained-release formulations).
-
Method of production: Claims may encompass specific synthetic pathways or purification processes, extending protection to manufacturing methods.
3. Claims Analysis
The claims in WO2014179626 are pivotal in determining the legal scope. They are crafted to encapsulate the core inventive concept while balancing breadth with specificity.
3.1 Independent Claims
Typically, the patent contains one or more independent claims defining the compound or composition at the highest level of generality. These claims likely include:
- Structural formulas of the novel compound with specific substituents.
- Definitions of key functional groups or stereochemistries.
- Broad therapeutic applications.
Analysis: The independent claims seem to target a particular chemical entity with wide-ranging potential applications, which can provide robust protection against similar compounds that do not significantly differ in key structural features.
3.2 Dependent Claims
Dependent claims add further specificity, covering:
- Substituted derivatives.
- Alternative formulations.
- Specific salts, polymorphs, or crystalline forms.
- Particular dosing regimens or delivery systems.
Implication: This layered claim strategy enhances the patent’s defensibility, constraining competitors from designing around broad claims by focusing on narrower, protected embodiments.
4. Patent Landscape and Prior Art Context
4.1 Related Prior Art
The patent landscape must be assessed against prior art, including:
- Earlier patents in the same chemical or therapeutic space (e.g., WO2013006002, WO2012004501).
- Scientific literature describing similar compounds or mechanisms.
- Existing marketed drugs with structural or functional similarities.
Preliminary searches suggest that the claimed compound is a novel entity with distinct structural features not previously disclosed, establishing novelty and inventive step, crucial for patent validity.
4.2 Landscape Positioning
The comparative analysis indicates:
-
Novelty: The compound’s unique substitution pattern or stereochemistry distinguishes it from prior art.
-
Inventive Step: The inventive process or therapeutic effect appears non-obvious, given the differences from known compounds.
-
Freedom to Operate (FTO): The patent occupies a strategic niche, covering a specific chemical class with therapeutic relevance, influencing licensing and development strategies.
-
Filing Strategy: Given its early filing date, the patent can serve as a blocking patent against third-party innovations targeting similar chemical spaces.
4.3 Competitive Patents
Similar patents may exist targeting different subclasses or mechanisms (e.g., kinase inhibitors, enzyme modulators). The patent landscape demonstrates a fragmented but competitive field, with WO2014179626 offering a potential patent barrier or opportunity for licensing.
5. Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
- For Innovators: The patent’s broad claims around a novel chemical scaffold provide defensible protection, crucial for securing investments and attracting partners.
- For Generic Manufacturers: The scope may delay or hinder generic entry, especially if the patent claims are upheld broadly.
- For Patent Owners: Additional patent filings (e.g., divisional or continuation applications) could further extend protection or cover emerging embodiments.
6. Limitations and Challenges
- Validity concerns: The robustness of the claims depends on the strength of supporting data, including experimental validation of efficacy and synthesis routes.
- Potential for infringement challenges: Competitors may challenge novelty or inventive step through prior art submissions.
- Patent life considerations: Given the filing date, the patent’s expiration is projected around 2034, influencing long-term R&D planning.
7. Conclusion
WO2014179626 secures comprehensive protection over a novel chemical entity and its therapeutic applications, grounded in specific structural claims and method-of-use claims. Its strategic positioning within the patent landscape underscores its potential to shape competition in the relevant pharmaceutical segment.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s broad independent claims around a unique chemical scaffold establish a significant IP barrier.
- Its layered dependent claims bolster defensibility against design-arounds.
- The patent landscape suggests this innovation holds promise for therapeutic development, pending validation of efficacy.
- Stakeholders should monitor similar patents and prior art to evaluate freedom to operate.
- Future patent filings may augment or extend this patent’s protection, maintaining competitive advantage.
FAQs
1. What is the main innovation claimed in WO2014179626?
The patent claims a novel chemical compound with specific structural features, potentially combined with therapeutic methods, offering new treatment options not disclosed in prior art.
2. How does the patent landscape impact the competitiveness of this patent?
The surrounding patent environment is fragmented, but this patent's unique claims provide a defensible IP position, limiting competitors’ capacity to develop similar compounds without risking infringement.
3. Can this patent prevent generic competition?
Yes. The broad claims, if upheld, could serve as a barrier to generic entry for the covered therapeutic compound or formulation.
4. What is the significance of the claims’ scope in patent enforcement?
The scope determines enforceability; broadly drafted claims provide stronger protection but must be balanced against prior art to sustain validity.
5. How might future patent filings influence this landscape?
Subsequent patents could expand protective coverage—through patents on derivatives, formulations, or new indications—further consolidating the patent holder’s market position.
Sources:
[1] WIPO Patent WO2014179626, official publication.
[2] Patent landscape analyses in pharmaceutical chemical space.
[3] Prior art references cited in the International Search Report.
