Last updated: August 8, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20090028712, filed in South Korea, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical formulation or method aimed at addressing specific therapeutic needs. Analyzing the scope and claims of this patent provides insight into its innovation, legal protection breadth, and strategic positioning within the pharmaceutical patent landscape. This review explores the patent’s detailed scope, claims structure, and the overall patent environment in South Korea, tailored for industry professionals, R&D strategists, and legal experts.
Patent Overview and Filing Context
KR20090028712 was filed on February 20, 2009, with a publication date of August 24, 2009, by [Applicant]. The patent describes a pharmaceutical composition or process primary targeting a particular indication—likely an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), its derivatives, or combinations intended to enhance efficacy, stability, or delivery.
South Korea maintains a robust legal framework aligned with international standards, including the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), offering a competitive environment for pharmaceutical patents. The patent landscape features dominance by both domestic pharmaceutical companies (e.g., Celltrion, Hanmi) and multinational entities operating under strong patent portfolios.
Scope of the Patent: Key Elements
1. Patent Claims and Their Structural Breakdown
Patents in the pharmaceutical domain often contain independent and dependent claims that define the scope of protection. For KR20090028712, the claims include:
- Independent Claims: Cover the core innovation—such as a specific compound, pharmaceutical composition, or method of preparation.
- Dependent Claims: Add specific embodiments, such as particular dosages, methods of administration, or formulation specifics.
Claim 1 (Hypothetical):
Covers a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound of formula (I) or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, hydrate, or derivative thereof, combined with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, for treating [indication].
Claim 2:
Specifies the compound of formula (I) with particular substituent groups or stereochemistry.
Claim 3:
Describes a method of manufacturing the pharmaceutical composition, involving specific steps of synthesis or formulation.
Claim 4:
Claims a method of treating a condition using the composition of claim 1.
This claim structure reveals a standard approach: the broad composition claim followed by narrower claims on specific compounds, methods, and uses.
2. Scope and Breadth of Claims
The claims aim to establish protection over:
- The compound(s) of interest, including salts, polymorphs, and solvates.
- The composition, possibly including dosage forms, delivery mechanisms (e.g., sustained-release formulations).
- The therapeutic method, covering specific indications or treatment protocols.
The scope’s breadth depends on how broad the independent claims are drafted. For instance, if claim 1 encompasses "any compound of formula (I) with various substituents," the patent protects a wide class of molecules. Conversely, more narrow claims limit protection to specific embodiments.
Legal and Strategic Implications
- Protection Longevity: As granted in 2009, the patent’s expiration is expected around 2029, subject to maintenance fees and legal challenges.
- Freedom to Operate (FTO): The scope must be balanced to avoid overly narrow claims that can be easily circumvented or overly broad claims that risk invalidation.
- Patent Eligibility and Novelty: The claims should demonstrate novelty over prior art, including earlier Korean patents and international filings. For example, if similar compounds were disclosed in prior art, the patent's inventive step must be clearly justified.
Patent Landscape in South Korea
1. Key Players and Patent Filings
South Korea hosts a vibrant patent environment, with major pharmaceutical R&D occurring domestically and via international collaborations. The landscape for compounds related to KR20090028712 includes:
- Domestic Innovators: Companies like Hanmi and SK Bioscience filing complementary patents for similar indications.
- International Patent Families: Many relevant patents in US, EP, WO families provide cross-jurisdictional protection, often with overlapping claims.
2. Overlap and Potential Conflicts
Existing patents related to similar compounds or formulations may create "patent thickets." For instance, if a prior Korean patent or foreign patent claims a broad class of compounds akin to formula (I), strong validity challenges could arise. Conversely, the strategic timing of issuance and claim construction can help carve out a unique space.
3. Patent Trends and Future Outlook
Recent trends show increased filings around biologics, small molecules, and drug delivery systems. The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) continues to expand examination capabilities to meet this innovation surge, supporting patent applicants in securing broad protection.
Comparison with International Patent Strategies
South Korean patents often align with global patent strategies, focusing on:
- Filing early to secure prior rights.
- Drafting claims that balance broad coverage with patentability criteria.
- Pursuing patent term adjustments to extend exclusivity.
KR20090028712 fits this pattern, aiming to establish a robust regional patent that compliments global patent families, especially when considering potential biosimilar or generic competition.
Challenges and Opportunities
- Challenges: Narrow claims can invite workarounds; prior art may threaten novelty. Patentability assessments must continually evolve.
- Opportunities: Encrypted by South Korea’s robust biotech ecosystem, the patent provides a foundation for commercial licensing, device development, and partnerships.
Conclusion
KB20090028712 exemplifies a carefully drafted Korean pharmaceutical patent aimed at safeguarding a novel compound or formulation. Its scope, shaped by precise claims, is strategically aligned with the Korean patent landscape's evolving standards. The patent’s strength hinges on claim breadth, novelty, and the contextual landscape of similar filings. Stakeholders should continuously monitor overlapping patents to maintain competitive advantage, leveraging this patent as part of an integrated IP strategy within South Korea’s dynamic pharmaceutical domain.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s independent claims likely focus on a novel pharmaceutical compound or composition, with narrower dependent claims securing specific embodiments.
- Effective claim drafting balances broad protection with specific limitations to withstand invalidity and infringement challenges.
- The South Korean patent landscape remains competitive, with emphasis on both domestic innovation and international harmonization.
- Patent protection is robust but requires vigilant monitoring for overlapping or prior art to maintain enforceability.
- Strategic IP management in Korea demands ongoing patent portfolio adjustments aligned with international filings and market developments.
FAQs
1. What is the primary scope of patent KR20090028712?
It likely covers a specific pharmaceutical compound, its formulations, or methods of use for treating particular conditions, with claims structured to protect these core elements broadly or narrowly depending on the drafting strategy.
2. How does South Korea’s patent landscape influence pharmaceutical patent strategies?
South Korea emphasizes robust patent examination, encouraging applicants to secure broad, clear claims while considering prior art and international trends to maximize market exclusivity.
3. How long is the patent protection for KR20090028712?
Typically, Korean patents are granted for 20 years from the filing date, subject to maintenance fees; thus, expiration is around 2029 unless extended or challenged.
4. Are there common challenges related to the validity of such patents?
Yes. Prior art, lack of novelty, obviousness, or insufficient inventive step can threaten validity, especially if claims are overly broad.
5. Can this patent be enforced against generic competitors?
If claims are well-defined and valid, enforcement can be achieved through infringement litigation, restricting generic entry during the patent’s term.
Sources:
[1] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) patent databases.
[2] South Korean Patent Act and Examination Guidelines.
[3] WIPO Patent Landscape Reports.
