Shionogi & Co., Ltd. is a Japan-based pharmaceutical company, mainly engaged in the research, development, purchase, manufacture and sale of pharmaceuticals, as well as pharmaceutical-related businesses. The Company mainly provides its products and services in Japan, Europe and North America markets.
In India, the Pharmaceutical business of Shionogi & Co., Ltd. is focused on Antiviral Drugs, Crystals of a Quinazoline Derivative, Monoclonal Antibody, Non-aromatic Heterocyclic Derivative, Salts of Quinazoline Derivative, AMPK Activator.
Shionogi & Co. Ltd. filed patent application numbered 1821/CHENP/2013 that is titled TRIAZINE DERIVATIVE AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOUND THAT CONTAINS SAME AND EXHIBITS ANALGESIC ACTIVITY. This patent application has been granted as Patent Number 312593.
The invention covers Chemical compound. The invention provides novel compounds having a P2X 3 and/or P2X 2 / 3 receptor antagonistic effect. A pharmaceutical composition having an analgesic effect or an improving effect of urination disorder comprising a compound of the formula (I):
wherein R h and R j are taken together to form a bond; R a and R b and/or R d and R e are taken together to form oxo or the like; R c is hydrogen, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl or the like; R f is -(CR 4a R 4b )n-R 2 ; R 4a and R 4b are hydrogen, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl or the like; R 2 is substituted or unsubstituted cycloalkyl or the like; n is an integer of 1 to 4; -R g is -X-R 3 ; -X- is -O-, -S- or the like; R 3 is substituted or unsubstituted cycloalkyl or the like, or its pharmaceutically acceptable salt or a solvate thereof.
During patent examination, the patent examiner raised objections under Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, wherein the examiner stated that the Claim(s) (1-36,37, 38, 40-59) are statutorily non-patentable. In the absence of experimental data, it is not clear if the substituted derivatives of the said compound and the composition thereof act to provide an enhancement of the known efficacy i.e., demonstrate a greater technical effect and/or differ significantly in properties w.r.t the known compound.
As a response to the said objection, the applicant presented Scientific and Technical arguments.
Advocate Rahul Dev is a Patent Attorney & International Business Lawyer practicing Technology, Intellectual Property & Corporate Laws. He is reachable at rd (at) patentbusinesslawyer (dot) com & @rdpatentlawyer on Twitter.
Quoted in and contributed to 50+ national & international publications (Bloomberg, FirstPost, SwissInfo, Outlook Money, Yahoo News, Times of India, Economic Times, Business Standard, Quartz, Global Legal Post, International Bar Association, LawAsia, BioSpectrum Asia, Digital News Asia, e27, Leaders Speak, Entrepreneur India, VCCircle, AutoTech).
Regularly invited to speak at international & national platforms (conferences, TV channels, seminars, corporate trainings, government workshops) on technology, patents, business strategy, legal developments, leadership & management.
