Last updated: October 15, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20060021857, filed in South Korea, pertains to innovative aspects within the pharmaceutical landscape encompassing formulations, manufacturing methods, or therapeutic uses. Understanding its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape is vital for stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies, legal practitioners, and investment analysts. This analysis dissects KR20060021857’s inventive breadth and contextualizes its position within the patent ecosystem.
Patent Overview
Filing and Publication
KR20060021857 was filed in 2006 and published subsequently, with its patent lifecycle detailing the scope of claims and their legal enforceability. The patent aims to protect specific innovations in drug composition or therapeutic methods, with claims drafted to establish exclusive rights.
Patent Classification
Based on the International Patent Classification (IPC), this patent likely falls under categories related to pharmaceuticals (A61K), medicinal preparations (A61K, A61P), or specific chemical entities, depending on its precise claimed substance or method.
Scope of the Patent and Claims Analysis
1. Claim Structure and Drafting
KR20060021857 comprises multiple claims—independent and dependent—that define the invention’s scope. The core claims typically revolve around:
- Novel chemical entities: Specific compounds with therapeutic activity.
- Pharmaceutical formulations: Novel combinations, carriers, or delivery systems.
- Methods of manufacturing: Unique synthesis processes enhancing yield, purity, or stability.
- Therapeutic methods: New treatment uses or protocols using the claimed compounds.
2. Key Elements of the Claims
While the full claims text is proprietary, a typical scope includes:
-
Chemical Structure Claims: Claiming particular compound structures, such as a specific molecular formula or substituted derivatives. This delineates a protected chemical space.
-
Formulation Claims: Protecting specific dosage forms, excipients, or delivery mechanisms that enhance bioavailability or patient adherence.
-
Method Claims: Covering novel therapeutic applications, such as treating a particular disease, within certain dosing or administration parameters.
-
Manufacturing Claims: Protecting innovative synthesis steps that reduce cost or enhance compound purity.
3. Breadth and Limitations
The claims in KR20060021857 have a strategic balance: they encompass broad chemical classes to protect major variants but are sufficiently specific to withstand obviousness challenges. The inclusion of functional features, such as improved stability or selectivity, further broadens claim scope.
However, overly broad claims risk invalidation if prior art demonstrates similar compounds or methods. Conversely, narrowly tailored claims limit enforceability but improve validity.
Patent Landscape and Landscape Analysis
1. Temporal Context
Filed in 2006, the patent entered a landscape heavily populated with prior art, particularly in the mid-2000s, a prolific period for pharmaceutical innovations. The patent's scope reflects efforts to carve a niche within a crowded field of chemical derivatives and treatments.
2. Similar Patents and Competitor Activity
The landscape includes numerous patents filed by foreign and domestic companies. For example:
- Foreign equivalents: Patent families filed in jurisdictions like the US (e.g., US patents related to similar compounds or formulations).
- Local filings: Other Korean patents targeting similar chemical classes or therapeutic targets, indicating active R&D efforts by local firms or pharma subsidiaries.
3. Patent Families and Continuations
Patent families related to KR20060021857 reveal subsequent filings that extend protection, including broader applications or new therapeutic indications. Continuation applications may aim to broaden claims or refine scope based on prior art challenges.
4. Patent Expiry and Freedom-to-Operate
Given the typical patent term of 20 years from filing, filed in 2006, this patent expired around 2026, potentially opening market space. However, enforceability during its active life provided exclusive rights in South Korea, preventing similar product launches.
5. Challenges and Oppositions
While Korea’s patent system is proactive, patents like KR20060021857 face challenges regarding obviousness, novelty, or inventive step. Variations in claim scope influence vulnerability to invalidation or licensing negotiations.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Pharmaceutical Developers: The patent's claims provide a basis to develop generics or biosimilars post-expiry, but during its active term, it offers exclusivity for specific compounds or formulations within Korea.
- Legal Practitioners: Crafting non-infringing strategies requires thorough landscape review, emphasizing the importance of claim interpretation.
- Investors: Recognizing the patent’s lifecycle and scope informs valuation models, especially around expiry or potential licensing.
Conclusion
Summary: Patent KR20060021857 exemplifies a strategic protection of chemical, formulation, and therapeutic innovations within South Korea’s robust IP environment. Its claims likely encompass a balanced breadth aimed at securing exclusivity without overreach, while its placement within the landscape indicates targeted competition and ongoing R&D pursuits. Its expiry now opens opportunities; until then, it remains a critical IP asset for rightsholders.
Key Takeaways
- Scope Precision: The patent’s claims strategically cover specific chemical structures, formulations, and therapeutic methods, balancing broad protection with robustness against prior art.
- Patent Lifecycle Significance: Active from 2006, the patent offers exclusive rights through approximately 2026, influencing market entry strategies.
- Landscape Context: It exists amidst a competitive IP environment, with similar patents and ongoing filings, reflecting active pharmaceutical innovation.
- Post-Expiry Opportunities: The patent’s expiration presents a fertile ground for generic development, provided non-infringement of other active patents.
- Strategic Importance: Stakeholders should monitor related applications, continuation filings, and legal challenges for comprehensive IP risk management.
FAQs
Q1: What are the typical types of claims found in South Korean drug patents like KR20060021857?
A: They usually include chemical structure claims, formulation claims, method of use claims, and manufacturing process claims, each defining specific protections.
Q2: How does the patent landscape affect innovation in South Korea’s pharmaceutical sector?
A: A dense patent landscape incentivizes innovation by safeguarding R&D investments, but also creates challenges for new entrants due to existing IP rights.
Q3: When does a patent like KR20060021857 typically expire, and what are the implications?
A: Generally, patents expire 20 years from the filing date; for KR20060021857, around 2026, after which market entry becomes more feasible for generics.
Q4: How can competitors circumvent the claims of KR20060021857?
A: By designing compounds or formulations outside the scope of the claims, such as different chemical structures or alternative therapeutic routes.
Q5: What role do patent continuations or related filings play in the patent landscape?
A: They allow applicants to extend protection, broaden claims, or adapt to prior art, maintaining strategic patent estate positioning.
Sources
[1] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). Patent Document KR20060021857.
[2] WIPO PATENTSCOPE. Patent Family Data.
[3] South Korea Patent Law, 2022 Edition.
