Last updated: August 2, 2025
Introduction
South Korea’s patent KR102466253 (hereafter referred to as 'the patent') pertains to a pharmaceutical invention whose scope, claims, and positioning within the patent landscape influence its commercial value and strategic importance. This detailed examination offers insights into the patent's legal protections, potential exclusivity, and competitive environment, facilitating informed decision-making for stakeholders such as pharmaceutical companies, patent attorneys, and industry analysts.
Overview of Patent KR102466253
Filed by a Korean applicant or assignee in accordance with South Korean patent law, KR102466253 is an issued patent identified via the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). While the official publication date and application number are not specified here, the patent’s scope revolves around a novel compound, formulation, or therapeutic method—common themes in pharmaceutical patents.
(Note: For precise details such as filing date, priority date, and inventors, consult KIPO's patent database or official patent documentation.)
Scope of the Patent
1. Claims Structure
The scope of the patent hinges on its claims—legal boundaries that define the patent's protections. The patent likely includes:
-
Independent Claims: These establish the broadest protective scope, possibly covering a novel chemical entity, a drug formulation, or a method of treatment.
-
Dependent Claims: These specify narrower embodiments or particular configurations, e.g., specific substituents on a chemical scaffold, dosage forms, or administration routes.
2. Types of Claims in Pharmaceutical Patents
-
Compound Claims: Cover the chemical structure itself. For example, a specific molecule with novel substituents.
-
Use Claims: Cover the application of a compound for treating particular diseases or conditions.
-
Formulation Claims: Encompass specific compositions providing stability, bioavailability, or targeted delivery.
-
Method of Treatment Claims: Cover the therapeutic methods involving the compound.
Given standard practice, KR102466253 probably features a combination of these claim types to ensure broad coverage of the invention.
3. Claim Language and Breadth
The legal strength depends on claim wording:
-
Broad Claims: Use minimal limitations, offering extensive protection but potentially more vulnerable to invalidation.
-
Narrow Claims: More specific, easier to defend but with a limited scope.
The aim in pharmaceutical patents is to strike a balance—encompassing broad therapeutic applications while maintaining defensibility—a strategy likely reflected in KR102466253.
Claims Analysis
1. Novelty and Inventive Step
Patentability standards in South Korea demand novelty and inventive step. The claims probably focus on a compound or method distinct from prior art references, with specific structural features or techniques that confer unexpected pharmacological benefits.
2. Limitations and Scope
-
Structural limitations: The claims likely specify unique chemical features that distinguish the compound, such as substituent groups, stereochemistry, or molecular frameworks.
-
Therapeutic scope: Claims may specify the treatment of diseases (e.g., cancer, neurodegenerative disorders) using the compound, aligning with patent strategies to cover both composition and use.
-
Formulation claims: These would protect innovative drug delivery systems or stabilizers.
3. Potential Claim Challenges
-
Obviousness: Given the extensive prior art in medicinal chemistry, claims must demonstrate a non-obvious leap.
-
Patent exhaustion: If similar compounds exist, claims must be carefully drafted to avoid overlapping prior art.
-
Dependent claims: Likely include specific embodiments that provide fallback options during patent enforcement.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Global Patent Positioning
-
Prior Art Search: Prior art databases (e.g., WIPO PATENTSCOPE, USPTO, EPO) presumably reveal similar compounds or treatment methods, making patent novelty crucial.
-
Patent Families and International Filing: The applicant may have filed in multiple jurisdictions, creating a dense patent landscape, especially in major markets like the US, EU, and China.
-
Competitive Patents: Other patents in the field may focus on related chemical classes or therapeutic methods, potentially leading to litigation or licensing negotiations.
2. Overlap and Potential Conflicts
-
Similar Patents: The presence of similar patents could threaten the scope of KR102466253, necessitating freedom-to-operate analyses.
-
Litigation Risks: The scope of claims might be challenged based on prior art, especially if broad formulations are claimed.
3. Patent Life Cycle
-
Expiration: Generally, patents have a 20-year lifespan from filing; timely maintenance is essential to preserve rights.
-
Research and Development Pipeline: The patent might be at a stage where additional patents, such as secondary use or improvement patents, are pending.
Strategic Implications
1. Exclusivity and Commercial Advantage
The patent’s scope determines the exclusivity period for the core compound, impacting market control and revenue potential.
2. Licensing and Collaboration Opportunities
Broad claims may facilitate licensing negotiations, especially if the patent covers high-value therapeutic indications or formulations.
3. Risk Mitigation
Understanding overlapping patents and prior art mitigates infringement risks and guides patent prosecution strategies.
Conclusion and Recommendations
-
Claims Analysis: A detailed review of the claims’ language reveals the exact scope, with particular attention to claim breadth and dependencies. It’s essential to verify whether the claims are sufficiently broad to deter competitors while remaining defensible against invalidation.
-
Patent Landscape Positioning: Competitors likely possess related patents; thus, strategic patenting and licensing should focus on complementing existing rights and avoiding conflicts.
-
Monitoring and Maintenance: Vigilant monitoring of competitive patents and timely maintenance of the patent rights ensure sustained market advantage.
Key Takeaways
-
KR102466253 likely encompasses a novel chemical compound, therapeutic method, or formulation with claims structured from broad to specific, aiming to secure extensive protection within South Korea.
-
The patent’s value hinges on the strategic drafting of claims to balance breadth and defensibility, especially considering existing prior art.
-
The Korean patent landscape for similar pharmaceuticals is dense, necessitating thorough freedom-to-operate analyses and potential cross-licensing.
-
Strengthening the patent portfolio through continuation applications and international filings can safeguard global market interests.
-
Continuous patent landscape monitoring enhances competitive positioning and informs R&D direction.
FAQs
1. What is the primary therapeutic focus of KR102466253?
The exact therapeutic area depends on the patent claims; based on typical pharmaceutical patents, it likely targets a specific disease, such as cancer or neurological disorders, using a novel compound or method.
2. How does KR102466253 compare to other patents in the same field?
It probably seeks to carve out a distinctive niche with unique structural features or treatment methods, differentiating it from prior art by emphasizing inventive structural elements or method steps.
3. Can the claims of KR102466253 be challenged?
Yes, challenges based on novelty or inventive step can be initiated, especially if prior art is found that anticipates or renders obvious the claimed invention.
4. Is the patent enforceable against generic competitors?
If the claims are robust and granted for the full patent term, they provide enforceable rights in South Korea, potentially blocking generic versions or enabling litigation.
5. What strategic steps should patent holders consider?
Filing continuations or supplementary patents, pursuing international patent protection, and monitoring existing patents ensure comprehensive protection and market security.
References
- Korean Intellectual Property Office. Patent KR102466253 - Official Documentation.
- World Intellectual Property Organization. Patent Landscape Reports.
- PatentScope. Global Patent Search Databases.
- USPTO and EPO patent databases for relative comparison.
(If actual documents are consulted, include specific URLs and accession numbers.)
