In covid-19 pandemic, application or mandatory patent licensing in pharmaceutical invention become world priority target. Many epidemiologists working to invent or invent around of vaccines, including Indonesia epidemiological labs (e.g. Eijkman lab in leading consortium on covid-19 vaccine in Indonesia).

Pharmaceutical related products or processes would be more valuable if protected by patents as demonstrated by several global or regional drug and pharma industries. Indonesia patent regulatory regime takes idea that only non-biological process can be granted for patent, excluding microorganism based invention. A discovery (incl. new usage of existing product, or new form of product with no significant efficacy) can be patented.

For example, biological process includes fertilization and a plant cutting method are unable to be patented. For a golden rice (rice cultivars) plant cannot be patented, except for its unicellular, for instance. Another patent-able object is nucleic acid modification process.

In that kind of patent drafting, you can consider to differ what are essential features and non-essential ones. If your invention is predominantly a product, then make it as the independent claim, while the process of making that products can be as the dependent claim, or vice versa.

I consider also what is the composition of a products presented to me, its essential features, its process of production, its primacy, prior arts, scientific data, subject matters, any test data, and any chemical compound depiction.

Prior arts of your related invention must be provided, and is elaborated in the background parts, including what is your invention strength, and other invention weakness in past inventions, or your technological based solution to it. The title section can be directly pharmaceutical forms with wider invention scope.

In claim drafting, however, you have to be clear, uncovered, and consistent in sense of any usage term between your claims and invention complete descriptions. Any inventive claim you made must be clearly completely supported by that description, meaning that do not claim what you have not yet elaborated in detail.

In your claim, do not mixed up with what features fall under process features and what are not: product with its compositions, process with its steps. Embodiment/representation (e.g. liquid, capsules, tablets, etc) of your invention is best depicted in your first claim, while derivative embodiment can follow it up.

In pharma patent examination process, the examiners recognize any use of pseudo dependent claims, and this is independent claim. They also well-trained in scooping the ‘product by process’ claim, a similar product output but different or unique production process, in simple words. For example, an extract of leaf will be equal to adjacent leaf extract, but the process of extraction is peculiar, like re-modification process of polymer configurations.

In pharmaceutical invention, use words like chemical compound, composition, and embodiment (injection, capsule, solute).

Examiners in DGIP also prefer two-part form claim format, that single style. Wording in claim also need to clear, not using word in expression of ‘certain’ amounts, but measurement units.

In short, to ensure DGIP pharma examiners quickly get to know you invention, you claims must be clear, consistent, and being supported in its description. If not, your inventions will subject to unity invention examination, either apriori or posterior examination. Lastly, any correspondence with examiner of your invention, kindly ensure not to make your boomerang on yourself, meaning that you clearly know what you write in response of any examiner inquire, and avoid of saying that you accidentally purported excess claims, for example.