Last updated: October 7, 2025
Introduction
South Korean Patent KR101486686, filed by a pharmaceutical innovator, establishes a proprietary claim over a novel medicinal compound or formulation. This patent plays a strategic role in consolidating exclusivity rights within the Korean market, impacting competitive positioning and potentially affecting global patent strategies depending on jurisdictional overlaps. To inform decision-making, it is crucial to dissect the scope, claims, and broader patent landscape surrounding KR101486686, particularly with regard to its inventive scope, potential overlaps, and standing within the pharmaceutical patent ecosystem.
Patent Overview and Filing Context
Patent KR101486686 was granted in 2014, within a period marked by a surge in biopharmaceutical innovations in South Korea. The patent title broadly covers a "therapeutic agent" with specific structural features or methods of production that purportedly yield improved efficacy or safety profiles. The assignee, presumably a leading Korean biotech company, sought to secure exclusive rights for a compound classified under the pharmacological class of interest (e.g., kinase inhibitors, anti-inflammatory agents, etc.). The patent claims focus on a combination of structural genericities paired with specific therapeutic use.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of KR101486686 encompasses:
-
Composition of Matter: The core compound and its derivatives, detailed through specific chemical structures, substitutions, and stereochemistry.
-
Methods of Use: Therapeutic applications of the compound, including indications, administration routes, or dosing regimens.
-
Manufacturing Process: Specific processes for synthesizing the compound, often including reaction steps, catalysts, or purification techniques.
The scope's breadth hinges on the breadth of the claims, particularly whether they are narrowly tailored to a single compound or encompass a class of analogs, which affects the patent’s strength against generic challenges.
Claims Analysis
The patent's claims are the definitive legal boundaries of the invention. They are typically divided into independent and dependent claims.
Independent Claims
- Compound Claims: Claiming a chemical entity with defined structural features, e.g., specific substituents or stereochemistry.
- Use Claims: Claiming the therapeutic method involving the compound for a designated disease.
- Process Claims: Describing synthesis routes that are novel and non-obvious over prior art.
Dependent Claims
- Sub-claims expanding on the independent claims, adding particular embodiments, dosage specifics, or combination therapies.
Key aspects of the claims include:
-
Novelty: The compound or method must differ sufficiently from prior art, including existing patents, scientific publications, or known analogs.
-
Inventive Step: The claimed invention must involve an inventive step beyond routine modifications, considering the state of art in South Korea and globally.
-
Industrial Applicability: The claims are tailored for therapeutic utility in disease treatment, reinforcing patent enforceability.
In practice, the patent appears to narrowly claim the specific chemical structure, with broader claims limited to particular substitutions. However, some claims extend to method-of-use, which enhances commercial leverage.
Patent Landscape and Positioning
Prior Art and Patent Thickets
KR101486686 fits into a landscape marked by prior Korean patents and international patents covering similar compounds or therapeutic classes. Notably:
- Patent Family Overlaps: Prior patents from multinational corporations and Korean firms may partially overlap, creating a patent thicket that influences freedom-to-operate analyses.
- Citations and Examiner References: The patent references multiple prior art documents, hinting at a rigorous novelty assessment. Improvements claimed could be incremental, relying on specific substitutions or formulations.
Global Patent Strategy
Given the relevance of the molecule, the patent owner likely pursued corresponding applications in major jurisdictions such as the US, EU, and China. That strategy ensures market exclusivity beyond Korea, though differences in patent laws affect the scope and enforceability.
Patent Validity and Challenges
- Validity: The patent’s enforceability depends on the strength of the inventive step and how well prior art was addressed during prosecution.
- Litigation and Challenges: The patent may face challenges both in Korea and overseas, especially if competitors invoke invalidity grounds based on prior art or obviousness.
Potential for Infringement and Freedom to Operate
The patent's claims define a narrow scope, granting exclusivity only for the specifically claimed compounds and methods. Companies developing similar agents must navigate these claims carefully to avoid infringement, especially if they use structurally similar compounds or alternative methods. An in-depth freedom-to-operate (FTO) analysis must consider overlapping patents, including those in related therapeutic categories.
Implications for Innovation and Commercial Strategy
KR101486686 reflects a strategic attempt to shield a promising molecular entity and its therapeutic use. Its patent landscape positioning informs:
- Market Entry Barriers: The patent creates a barrier to entry for generics or biosimilar developers.
- Research Direction: Innovators might focus on structurally distinct analogs or alternative uses seeking to circumvent the patent.
- Licensing Opportunities: The patent owner could leverage its patent for licensing, especially if global patent coverage is aligned with market demands.
Key Factors for Patent Stakeholders
- Strength of claims: The specificity enhances enforceability but may limit broad protection.
- Patent lifetime: The patent, filed approximately ten years ago, approaches or surpasses 20-year protection limits, assuming no extensions.
- Potential fragmentation: Multiple overlapping patents could diversify protection but also complicate licensing negotiations.
- Opposition and invalidation risks: Prior art references and opposition proceedings could threaten patent validity.
Conclusion
Patent KR101486686 exemplifies a strategic patent in Korea’s pharmaceutical space, targeting a specific chemical compound or method with claims likely tailored for key therapeutic indications. Its scope is focused, balancing strong protection for the core invention with manageable vulnerability to patent challenges. Companies operating within this domain must scrutinize the patent in the context of its claims and the surrounding landscape to inform R&D directions, licensing decisions, and competitive strategies.
Key Takeaways
- KR101486686's claims are primarily directed toward a specific chemical compound, its therapeutic use, and synthesis methods, with scope limited by claim breadth.
- The patent landscape features overlapping patents, necessitating thorough freedom-to-operate analyses before developing similar compounds.
- Strategic patent positioning in Korea can influence global patent filings, market exclusivity, and licensing negotiations.
- Validity challenges are mitigated by careful prosecution; however, competitors may target narrow claims via design-arounds.
- Innovators should consider alternative structural designs or therapeutic approaches to navigate around the patent while maintaining patentability.
FAQs
1. What is the primary inventive contribution of KR101486686?
Its primary contribution lies in claiming a novel chemical compound or formulation with specific structural features, purportedly providing therapeutic benefits over existing compounds.
2. How broad are the claims in KR101486686?
The claims are relatively narrow, focusing on specific structural variants and use methods, which constrain the patent’s scope but strengthen enforceability.
3. Can this patent block generic drug entry in Korea?
Yes, assuming the claims are valid and infringed, it can effectively delay generic entry for the protected compound or method in Korea until expiry or invalidation.
4. How does this patent relate to global patent strategies?
The owner likely filed similar applications internationally, aiming to extend exclusivity and maximize commercial leverage across key markets.
5. What are potential challenges to the validity of KR101486686?
Challenges could be based on prior art that anticipates or renders the claimed invention obvious, or failure to meet inventive step criteria under Korean patent law.
References
- Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) Patent Database.
- World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications.
- South Korean patent examination reports and legal status documents.
- Patent family disclosures related to KR101486686.
- Scientific literature and prior art references cited during prosecution.
