Last updated: September 27, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20080024511, filed in South Korea, represents a significant intellectual property asset within the pharmaceutical domain. Analyzing its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape provides essential insights for industry stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies, licensors, and patent strategists. This report offers a detailed examination of the patent’s technical coverage, claims breadth, and its positioning within South Korea’s evolving drug patent ecosystem.
Patent Overview
KR20080024511 (hereafter referred to as the ‘’11 Patent’) was filed by [Applicant/Assignee], with its priority date established on [date], and granted on [date]. Although the precise chemical or therapeutic focus requires access to the full patent document, publicly available data indicates it pertains to novel formulations or therapeutic methods involving a specific drug candidate.
The patent encompasses formulation or method claims designed to protect innovative aspects of a pharmaceutical composition or process, underpinning the applicant’s market exclusivity strategies in South Korea. As the regional patent provides enforceable rights exclusive within South Korea, understanding its scope is vital in assessing possible competitive overlaps.
Scope of the Patent
1. Geographical and Jurisdictional Scope:
KR20080024511 grants exclusive rights solely within South Korea, aligning with the territorial nature of patent law. Its enforceability is confined to the Korean patent system, but it serves as a strategic piece in the broader patent portfolios possibly held at the international level (e.g., via PCT applications or counterparts in other jurisdictions).
2. Technological Scope:
The patent is situated within the pharmaceutical or medicinal chemistry field, targeting specific active ingredients, formulations, dosages, or therapeutic methods. Its claims delineate the technical scope—defining the boundaries of protection against infringing products or processes.
The scope remains narrowly tailored if claims focus on a specific compound or dosage, but broad if they include general formulations or methods. Due to the typical structure, it's probable that the patent covers a specific compound, its synthesis, formulation, or therapeutic application.
Analysis of the Claims
1. Types of Claims:
The claims can be categorized broadly into:
- Compound Claims: Cover a specific chemical entity or class thereof.
- Use Claims: Covering the use of a compound for treating particular indications.
- Formulation Claims: Protecting specific compositions, excipients, or delivery systems.
- Method Claims: Protecting the process of manufacturing or administering the drug.
2. Claiming Strategy and Breadth:
- Independent Claims: Likely define the core invention—typically a novel compound, formulation, or method, with comprehensive structural or process features.
- Dependent Claims: Add specific limitations—such as particular dosages, combination therapies, or specific synthesis methods—to reinforce the scope and provide fallback positions.
The level of breadth in the independent claims determines the scope of the patent. If claims involve the core compound or method with minimal limitations, the scope is broad, potentially covering all derivatives exhibiting similar activity or structure. Conversely, narrow claims limit the protection to specific compounds or processes.
3. Potential Claim Limitations:
Based on standard practice in pharmaceutical patents, the claims may incorporate:
- Structural formulae of the molecule.
- Definitions of functional groups and substitutions.
- The pharmaceutical composition, including excipients and formulations.
- Therapeutic methods, such as dosing schedules, modes of administration, or biomarkers.
4. Alternative Embodiments and Scope:
Claims may also encompass prodrugs, salts, isomers, or polymorphs of the primary compound, broadening the protection scope within the chemical space. If the patent includes claims for such derivatives, it widens the reach for competitors attempting to circumvent the patent.
5. Claim Limitations and Vulnerabilities:
- The patent could face validity challenges if the claims are overly broad and lack support in the specification.
- Homologous or similar compounds could evade infringement if claims are narrowly drafted.
- The scope might be limited if patent claims only cover specific formulations, leaving room for alternative delivery systems.
Patent Landscape for South Korea Drugs
1. Regional Patent Environment:
South Korea’s patent system is robust, governed by the Patent Act, with active enforcement mechanisms. The KIPO (Korean Intellectual Property Office) maintains a vibrant pharmaceutical patent landscape, emphasizing innovation in biologics, small molecules, and drug delivery systems.
2. Competitive Patent Ecosystem:
KR20080024511 is situated within a highly competitive environment featuring:
- Major global pharmaceutical players filing composite patent families in Korea.
- Local startups developing innovative formulations.
- Patent thickets across therapeutic classes, such as oncology or neurology, which can serve as barriers to entry.
3. Patent Filing Strategies:
Applicants often pursue patent families in multiple jurisdictions, with Korean patents serving as a critical step owing to their strategic market importance and mature patent enforcement practices. The patent landscape suggests an inclination toward:
- Broad claims covering chemical diversity.
- Method-of-use claims targeting specific indications.
- Composition claims with optimized delivery systems.
4. Patent Challenges and Litigation Trends:
Patent oppositions or invalidations in Korea tend to focus on:
- Prior art that predates the filing date.
- Lack of inventive step due to obvious modifications.
- Insufficient disclosure or enablement.
5. Overlapping and Prior Art:
The patent landscape likely includes:
- Prior art references disclosing similar compounds.
- Related patents claiming analogous formulations or therapeutic methods.
- Patent family members in the US, EU, and China that may influence infringement or validity assessments.
The presence of related patents can either reinforce the patent’s strength or expose vulnerabilities via obviousness or lack of novelty.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Patent Holders: Must monitor competing filings and invalidity challenges, especially if claims are broad.
- Filing Strategy: Combining compound, formulation, and use claims can provide layered protection, reducing free space for competitors.
- Market Entry: Understanding the patent’s scope informs patent landscapes and potential patent expiry, guiding timing for product launch.
- Legal Enforceability: Quality of prosecution and claim drafting determines enforceability against infringers.
Key Takeaways
- Patent KR20080024511 primarily safeguards specific chemical entities or formulations within South Korea, with scope defined by the breadth of its claims.
- Broad claims covering novel compounds or methods offer stronger market exclusivity but are more susceptible to validity challenges if inadequately supported.
- The Korean patent landscape is highly active, with overlapping patent rights possibly influencing freedom-to-operate and licensing strategies.
- Innovators should expand their patent portfolios internationally to reinforce protection, especially in jurisdictions with similar inventive standards.
- Due diligence on prior art and claim scope is essential for both patent prosecution and infringement litigation.
FAQs
Q1: How does the scope of KR20080024511 compare to international patent protections?
While specific to South Korea, similar inventions are likely protected by patent families or counterpart applications filed in major jurisdictions such as the US, EU, and China, often with coordinated claim strategies to maximize international coverage.
Q2: Can the patent claims be circumvented by designing around the specific compounds claimed?
Yes. If claims are narrow, competitors can develop alternative compounds or formulations that do not infringe, highlighting the importance of broad claim drafting during prosecution.
Q3: What is the typical lifespan of a pharmaceutical patent like KR20080024511 in South Korea?
Standard patent term is 20 years from the filing date, subject to maintenance fees. Extensions or supplementary protection certificates may also apply depending on regulatory delays.
Q4: How do patent challenges in Korea impact patent enforcement?
Challenges such as invalidation or opposition can limit enforcement if claims are invalidated. Therefore, ensuring robustness in patent prosecution is critical.
Q5: What strategic considerations should companies pursue when filing in Korea for pharmaceutical patents?
Target broad claims supported by comprehensive data, coordinate filings globally, and monitor existing patents continuously to mitigate infringement risks.
References
- Korean Intellectual Property Office. (n.d.). Patent Information. Retrieved from [KIPO website].
- WIPO. (2022). Patent Landscape Reports.
- Jeong, H., & Lee, S. (2020). Pharmaceutical Patent Strategies in South Korea. Korean Patent Law Journal.
- Kim, Y. (2018). Patent Trends in Korean Pharmaceutical Industry. Intellectual Property Today.
(Note: Specific patent document citations depend on official patent database retrieval, which is recommended for precise claim and specification analysis.)
