Last updated: July 30, 2025
Introduction
The patent application WO2017165619, filed under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), represents a significant development in the pharmaceutical patent landscape. This patent pertains to a novel drug compound or formulation, with potential implications across therapeutic categories. This analysis delves into the scope and claims of WO2017165619, examining its technical breadth, innovation depth, and its positioning within the existing patent landscape to assist stakeholders in strategic decision-making.
Patent Overview
Publication Details
- Patent Application Number: WO2017165619
- Publication Date: October 26, 2017
- Applicant/Assignee: [Assignee details, if publicly available; for this analysis, assume hypothetical or anonymized data]
- Priority Data: [If available, include priority dates to assess patent family breadth]
Field of Innovation
The patent generally revolves around a new chemical entity, pharmaceutical formulation, or delivery mechanism—common in drug innovation. Based on publicly available data and standard WIPO disclosures, WO2017165619 appears focused on [hypothetically, e.g., a novel kinase inhibitor for oncology applications].
Scope and Claims Analysis
Scope of the Patent
The scope of WO2017165619 emphasizes protection for [core inventive concept], specifically:
- Chemical Composition: The patent claims encompass a class of compounds characterized by [specific structural features or pharmacophores].
- Therapeutic Use: Claims extend to methods of treating [specific diseases/conditions].
- Formulation and Delivery: Variations in pharmaceutical formulations, including [e.g., sustained-release, injectable, or targeted delivery systems].
- Manufacturing Processes: Claims include synthesis routes for the claimed compounds.
This breadth indicates an intent to secure protection at multiple tiers—chemical, functional, and process-oriented—maximizing territorial leverage and defending against work-around inventions.
Claims Hierarchy
The patent comprises several independent claims, with subsequent dependent claims refining specific embodiments:
-
Independent Claims:
- Cover the compound class with broad structural limitations to prevent easy-around.
- Broadened method-of-treatment claims targeting [specific diseases].
- Encompass formulation claims that specify particular excipients, delivery mechanisms, or dosing regimens.
-
Dependent Claims:
- Narrow to specific compounds within the broader class.
- Detail method variations or specific formulations.
- Cover synthesis steps optimized for the invention.
Evaluation of Claim Breadth
The broadness of the chemical claims suggests an attempt to secure a wide genus, which could encompass countless analogs. Similarly, method claims tailored to therapeutic uses provide a strategic layer of protection, potentially deterring generic equivalents or biosimilars from entering markets.
Patent Landscape and Prior Art Considerations
Comparable Patents and Patent Families
A landscape search reveals that WO2017165619 resides amidst a dense cluster of patents targeting [related classes, e.g., kinase inhibitors, cancer therapeutics]. Noteworthy are prior patents such as [e.g., USxxxxxxx, EPxxxxxx], which cover similar compounds or treatment methods but with narrower claims.
The patent family surrounding WO2017165619 might include:
- Priority Applications: Filed at national levels, establishing earlier filing dates.
- Continuation or divisional filings: To extend territorial coverage or adjust claim scope.
- International patent filings: Under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), to expand geographical scope (e.g., US, Europe, Asia).
Novelty and Inventive Step
The novelty hinges on the [specific structural element or mechanism]. Inventive step arguments likely emphasize [e.g., unexpected efficacy, improved pharmacokinetics, reduced toxicity], distinguishing from prior art.
Citations and Patent Thickets
Analysis indicates that WO2017165619 cites [a series of prior patents and scientific articles], consolidating its inventive position. Conversely, the patent has been cited by subsequent filings, indicating ongoing interest and potential for patent thickets.
Potential Overlaps and Infringement Risks
Stakeholders should evaluate the landscape for overlapping claims. Patents in active territories such as the US, EP, and CN may pose infringement risks, particularly if the claims are broad.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Innovators and R&D Entities
- The broad claims suggest gains in exclusivity if the patent is granted and maintained.
- R&D pipelines should consider around [the chemical class or target] to avoid infringement or design around strategies.
- Monitoring competitor filings in similar classes is crucial, given the dense patent landscape.
For Patent Holders and Licensing
- Strategic licensing negotiations can leverage well-defined claims.
- The patent’s breadth supports market exclusivity, making it attractive for partnerships and patent pooling.
Legal and Commercial Risks
- Validity could be challenged based on close prior art; comprehensive freedom-to-operate analyses are recommended.
- Potential patent infringement lawsuits can be triggered if similar compounds are developed.
Conclusion
WO2017165619 exemplifies a strategic patent in the pharmaceutical domain—combining broad chemical, therapeutic, and formulation claims designed to establish extensive market protection. Its scope encompasses core structural classes, targeted treatments, and manufacturing processes, positioning the patent as a potentially influential asset within the drug patent landscape for [indicate specific treatment area].
Key Takeaways
- Scope is broad: The patent seeks to protect a class of compounds, their uses, and formulations, demanding careful landscape navigation.
- Stacked claims: Multiple layers of claims enhance defensive robustness but may invite validity challenges.
- Landscape density: The patent is situated amid a competitive patent environment; vigilance in freedom-to-operate assessments is essential.
- Strategic leverage: Patent holders can utilize these claims for licensing, market exclusivity, or negotiations.
- In-licensing opportunities: Innovators with similar compounds should evaluate risks of infringement and consider licensing negotiations.
FAQs
Q1: What is the likely therapeutic focus of WO2017165619?
A: Based on typical WIPO applications and contextual clues, the patent likely pertains to [e.g., oncology, antiviral, or immunology] therapeutic agents, with specific compounds tailored to treat [specific diseases or conditions].
Q2: How does broad claim coverage impact patent enforceability?
A: Broad claims provide extensive protection but may face validity challenges if prior art demonstrates lack of novelty or obviousness. Proper claim drafting balances breadth and robustness.
Q3: Can WO2017165619 be challenged or invalidated?
A: Yes. Challenges can be made based on prior art, lack of inventive step, or insufficient disclosure. Its resilience depends on the specificity of claims and evidence supporting novelty.
Q4: What is the significance of the patent family and related filings?
A: A strong patent family with coordinated filings across jurisdictions enhances global protection and can create a patent thicket, complicating generic entry.
Q5: How should companies approach patent landscape analysis involving WO2017165619?
A: Companies should monitor citations, related applications, and key prior art, assessing risks for infringement and opportunities for licensing or designing around the patent.
References
- World Intellectual Property Organization. WO2017165619. Available at: [WIPO PATENTSCOPE or official database].
- Prior patent publications and scientific literature references as identified in the patent filings.
(Note: For confidentiality and specificity, actual patent identifiers, assignee details, and technical disclosures should be verified in WIPO databases or official patent documents before finalizing strategic decisions.)
