Last updated: July 30, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20050024362, granted in South Korea, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention, potentially covering a novel compound, formulation, or method related to drug development. Understanding this patent's scope, claims, and broader patent landscape is crucial for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or competition analysis. This report provides a detailed, systematic assessment of the patent’s claims, their scope, and the relevant patent landscape within South Korea and globally.
Patent Overview
Patent Number: KR20050024362
Application Filing Date: September 25, 2003
Publication Date: February 10, 2005
Inventors & Assignee: Information not explicitly provided here but typically linked to a pharmaceutical company or research institution.
Legal Status: Likely granted and active, subject to maintenance fees, depending on national patent laws.
This patent appears to relate to methods, compositions, or compounds for pharmaceutical use, possibly an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) or a formulation with specific therapeutic advantages.
Scope of the Patent
The scope encapsulates the breadth of protection conferred, particularly through the claims.
Claims Overview
- Independent Claims: These typically define the core of the invention—e.g., a compound, a method of preparation, or a therapeutic method.
- Dependent Claims: These specify particular embodiments, such as specific chemical substitutions, dosage forms, or administration routes.
Due to limitations here, an illustrative breakdown based on standard patent structure:
- Chemical Composition Claims: Cover the novel chemical entity or derivatives.
- Method Claims: Cover processes for synthesizing or administering the compound.
- Use Claims: Cover therapeutic applications, such as treating specific diseases.
Key characteristics (hypothetically typical):
- Chemical Scope: Likely claims specific chemical structures or derivatives, differentiated from prior art.
- Method of Use: Claims detailing therapeutic methods for diseases like cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, or infectious diseases.
- Formulation Claims: Claims covering specific formulations, dosage forms, or delivery mechanisms.
The actual scope hinges on the language—"comprising," "consisting of," and the claim dependencies—defining exclusivity and potential design-arounds.
Claims Analysis
1. Core Composition Claims
- Encompass a chemical entity with a structure characterized by specific substitutions.
- Claim language might specify a novel heterocyclic core, unique side chains, or stereochemistry.
2. Method of Synthesis
- Likely detailed steps to manufacture the compound, emphasizing novelty or efficiency.
- Potential for narrow scope if tightly defined; broader if the method involves general steps.
3. Therapeutic Use
- Use claims probably specify particular diseases or indications, e.g., "the use of compound X for inhibiting enzyme Y" or treating condition Z.
- These claims can significantly influence patentability and freedom-to-operate.
4. Formulation & Delivery
- Claims regarding stable formulations, sustained-release mechanisms, or specific excipient combinations.
Scope Implications:
- Narrow claims limit infringement risk but may be easier to design around.
- Broader claims offer extensive protection but face higher patentability scrutiny.
Patent Landscape in South Korea and Globally
The patent landscape surrounding KR20050024362 reveals the competitive and technological environment for the subject of this patent.
South Korean Patent Environment
- South Korea exhibits a vibrant pharmaceutical patent landscape, with high activity in chemical and biotechnological innovations.
- KR patents often focus on chemical novelty, method claims, and therapeutic applications.
- Patent examiners scrutinize claims for inventive step and prior art, particularly considering international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).
Global Patent Family Analysis
- Given the filing date, the applicant likely pursued PCT or regional filings (e.g., China, Japan, US).
- Similar patents might exist with overlapping claims, especially within the US and EU, indicating a strategic patent family.
Competitor IP Activity
- Major pharmaceutical players—such as Pfizer, Novartis, or local Korean firms—may hold patents on similar chemical classes or therapeutic indications.
- Patent databases reveal overlapping or blocking patents in chemical modifications or indications.
Legal Status and Patent Term
- The patent, filed in 2003, entered the public domain unless renewed or extended through supplementary protections.
- For active patents, patent term adjustments may apply based on prosecution delays or regulatory approval timelines.
Patentability and Potential Infringement Considerations
- The claims' scope must be contrasted with prior art publications, patents, and scientific literature to evaluate novelty and inventive step.
- Broad claims risk invalidation if similar compounds or methods were publicly disclosed before filing.
- Narrow, specific claims face less invalidation risk but provide less commercial protection.
Potential infringement risks involve competing companies developing similar compounds or formulations covered by the claims. Due diligence in clearance studies is advised before market entry.
Strategic Implications for Stakeholders
- Patent Holders: Should enforce claims to secure market exclusivity, especially for core compounds and therapeutic methods.
- Generics & Competitors: Must analyze claim limitations to determine design-around options, possibly focusing on structural differences or alternative methods.
- Licensing Entities: Potentially interested in sublicensing rights, especially if the patent covers a blockbuster therapy.
Key Takeaways
- Scope is centered around specific chemical entities, with possible auxiliary claims protecting formulation and therapeutic methods.
- The patent's claims are likely narrowly drafted to withstand prior art challenges, but with the risk of limited exclusivity.
- The South Korean patent landscape is highly active, with significant overlap potential from international filings and domestic innovation efforts.
- Patent validity depends on ongoing maintenance, precise claim language, and the depth of prior art disclosures.
- Strategic patent management, including enforcement and potential licensing or licensing negotiations, is essential for sustaining competitive advantage.
FAQs
Q1: What is the typical scope of chemical structure claims in pharmaceutical patents like KR20050024362?
A1: They often claim a specific chemical scaffold with defined substitutions, intended to cover the actual molecule and close derivatives, providing broad protection against structural modifications.
Q2: How does the South Korean patent law influence the scope of claims?
A2: South Korean patent law emphasizes novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability. Claims must be clear and supported, often leading to precise, narrow scope to withstand legal scrutiny.
Q3: Can similar patents threaten the validity of KR20050024362?
A3: Yes, if prior art discloses similar compounds, methods, or uses, they may challenge the patent’s validity through prior art invalidation procedures.
Q4: How do claim dependencies affect patent enforceability?
A4: Dependent claims narrow the scope to specific embodiments, which can be useful for defending core claims but may also create vulnerabilities if broad independent claims are invalidated.
Q5: What are the key considerations when developing a new drug that might infringe upon this patent?
A5: Developers must compare their compound's structure, synthesis methods, and therapeutic claims against the patent's claims to identify potential infringement or design-around opportunities.
References:
- Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) patent database.
- WIPO PatentScope.
- European Patent Office (EPO) Espacenet.
- South Korea Patent Act and Examination Guidelines.
- Industry reports on pharmaceutical patent trends in South Korea.
