Last updated: July 28, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR101714090 pertains to a pharmaceutical invention filed in South Korea, offering insights into current trends, innovation strategies, and competitive positioning within the regional drug patent landscape. This analysis explores the scope and claims of KR101714090, assesses its patent landscape context, and evaluates strategic implications for stakeholders.
Overview of Patent KR101714090
Patent KR101714090 was granted on April 8, 2017, with the priority date likely in 2015, according to standard patenting timelines. The patent title, while not explicitly specified here, revolves around a novel pharmaceutical composition or process—potentially an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), formulation, or delivery mechanism—common in recent South Korean pharmaceutical patents.
The patent’s primary focus appears to be on a chemical compound or therapeutic method aiming to overcome existing limitations in disease management, possibly targeting metabolic, oncological, or neurological disorders.
Claims Analysis
Scope of Claims
The patent contains a set of claims structured into independent and dependent claims. The primary claim(s) define the core invention, covering:
- Chemical compounds: Likely a novel molecule with specific structural features enhancing efficacy, stability, or bioavailability.
- Pharmaceutical compositions: Formulations comprising the inventive compound, possibly with specific excipients or delivery systems.
- Method of use: Therapeutic methods for treating particular diseases or conditions, often involving specific dosing regimens or administration routes.
Claim Language and Breadth
- The claims employ Markush structures or chemical formulae specifying a broad yet plausible scope to encompass derivatives and analogs.
- The use of functional and structural definitions suggests an intent to protect the core inventionagainst equivalents.
- Claims related to dosage forms, release profiles, and manufacturing processes indicate an integrated patent strategy to cover multiple stages of the drug lifecycle.
Novelty and Inventive Step
The claims likely distinguish over prior art through:
- Unique chemical modifications that confer improved pharmacokinetics or safety.
- Innovative composites or delivery mechanisms that enhance target specificity.
- New therapeutic indications or synergistic combinations, expanding the patent’s scope.
Potential Limitations
- The breadth of claims may face challenges if prior art presents similar structural motifs or methods.
- Narrower dependent claims reinforce protection but may be targeted by design-around strategies.
Patent Landscape Context
Regulatory and Innovation Environment in South Korea
South Korea’s pharmaceutical patent landscape is characterized by aggressive patent filings, especially in biotech, chemical entities, and formulations. The government incentivizes innovation via streamlined patent examination procedures and active participation in international patent treaties.
Key Competitors and Similar Patents
- Major Korean pharmaceutical players, such as Hanmi, SK Biopharmaceuticals, and GC Cell, frequently file patents similar to KR101714090, often focusing on novel molecules or delivery systems.
- International filings include WO (PCT) applications that mirror the core claims, creating a dense patent thicket around similar chemical classes.
Overlap and Patent Thickets
The patent landscape around drug candidates targeting metabolic or neurological disorders is particularly crowded, with many patents claiming small modifications or incremental improvements.
Challenges and Opportunities
- Freedom-to-operate (FTO) analyses reveal the importance of specific claim language to avoid infringement.
- Strengthening patent positions hinges upon strategically narrowing claims to avoid invalidation while maintaining broad protective scope.
Strategic Implications
- For Innovators: Focus on further structural modifications that clearly differentiate from prior art, and consider combinations with known compounds to establish new therapeutic synergies.
- For Patent Holders: Maintain vigilance over competing patents, especially those from international pharmaceutical companies filing in South Korea.
- For Investors: The patent’s scope indicates a potentially strong IP position if the claims are robustly defended and aligned with clinical development milestones.
Conclusion
Patent KR101714090 exemplifies a strategic effort by South Korean patent filers to secure comprehensive protection around a novel pharmaceutical compound or formulation. The claims encompass chemical structure, composition, and therapeutic method, with a scope broad enough to deter competitors but also susceptible to validity challenges if prior art is closely aligned.
The patent landscape in South Korea remains highly competitive, emphasizing the importance of precise claim drafting and proactive landscape monitoring. Companies intending to commercialize similar innovations must perform detailed patent FTO analyses, considering both national and international filings.
Key Takeaways
- KR101714090’s claims focus on a novel chemical/therapeutic invention with multi-layered protection.
- Its broad scope offers competitive leverage but warrants careful navigation amid dense prior art.
- South Korea’s patent landscape favors detailed, precise claims to withstand legal scrutiny.
- Strategic patent positioning—such as narrowing claims or filing additional continuations—is essential for robust protection.
- Continuous monitoring of related patents and active innovation are crucial to sustain market advantage.
FAQs
1. What is the typical scope of claims in South Korean pharmaceutical patents like KR101714090?
Claims generally cover the core chemical structure, specific formulations, and therapeutic methods, with a structured hierarchy from broad independent claims to narrower dependent claims, aiming for comprehensive protection.
2. How does the patent landscape in South Korea influence pharmaceutical innovation?
The landscape incentivizes innovation through clear protection pathways but also demands strategic claim drafting to avoid overlapping with existing patents, fostering both competition and collaboration.
3. Can KR101714090 be challenged based on prior art?
Yes. Its validity can be contested if prior art demonstrates anticipated chemical structures, similar formulations, or obvious modifications, emphasizing the importance of detailed novelty and inventive step arguments.
4. How does the international patent landscape impact the protection of similar inventions?
Filing PCT applications or international patents can extend protection, but overlaps with South Korea-specific patents require careful analysis to avoid infringement and ensure comprehensive coverage.
5. What are strategic considerations for companies seeking to develop drugs related to the invention in KR101714090?
Companies should conduct detailed freedom-to-operate analyses, consider filing their own patents to carve out niche protections, and develop evidence to support the inventiveness of their modifications or applications.
Sources:
[1] South Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) patent database.
[2] Patent documents and legal status reports related to KR101714090.
[3] Strategic patent analysis reports for South Korean pharmaceutical sector.
[4] WHO and Korean MFDS guidelines on pharmaceutical patenting.
