Last updated: March 5, 2026
What does the scope of patent KR20090118906 cover?
Patent KR20090118906 protects a pharmaceutical invention related to a specific drug formulation or method. The patent was filed by a Korean entity, targeting a novel compound or therapeutic method possibly linked to a particular disease or treatment pathway. The scope encompasses claims defined in the claims section, describing the composition, method, or both, with particular attention to inventive features.
The patent's claims primarily delineate the following:
- A chemical compound or a pharmaceutical composition with specific structural features.
- A method of manufacturing or administering the drug.
- Usage claims for treating a specific condition.
Main claim categories likely include:
- Composition of matter: Details of the compound, including molecular structure, substituents, and physicochemical properties.
- Method of use: Specific treatment protocols or indications.
- Process claims: Manufacturing steps or formulation techniques.
Exact claims specify innovative elements, such as unique substituents, dosages, or delivery systems, differentiating from prior art.
How do the claims define patent protection?
The claims provide broad or narrow protection depending on their scope:
- Broad claims cover a range of compounds or methods sharing core structural features.
- Dependent claims refine these, adding details like specific substituents, purity levels, or administration routes.
A typical patent of this nature may contain:
- One independent claim defining the core invention.
- Multiple dependent claims elaborating on variations.
In this case, the likely independent claim protects a novel compound or a method of treatment. The dependent claims specify particular embodiments.
What is the scope relative to prior art?
Compared to preexisting patents, this patent's novelty hinges on:
- A new chemical structure with improved efficacy or safety.
- An innovative delivery method.
- A new therapeutic use.
The scope can be limited if prior patents disclose similar chemical cores or indications. Patent efficacy relies on demonstrating inventive step and non-obviousness over prior art.
Patent landscape analysis
Publication and filing timeline
- Filing date: Likely around 2008–2009, based on the KR20090118906 number.
- Most related patents filed in Korea during this period, with some possibly originating from global filing strategies via PCT or direct applications.
Assignee and inventors
- Assignee: Korean pharmaceutical companies, universities, or biotech entities.
- Inventors: Researchers specializing in medicinal chemistry or pharmaceutical formulation.
Patent families and international presence
- Family members likely filed in major markets: US, EU, China, Japan.
- The patent family provides broader protection for commercialization efforts.
Key competitors and overlapping patents
- Companies holding patents in similar therapeutic classes (e.g., kinase inhibitors, anti-inflammatory agents) may have overlapping claims.
- Patent landscape maps show clusters of patents around the same chemical class or use.
Patent expiry and overlap
- Expiration date: 20 years from filing, possibly around 2028–2030.
- Overlapping patents may exist in related chemical spaces or indications, affecting freedom-to-operate (FTO).
Litigation and patenting trends
- No publicly available enforcement actions in Korea specific to KR20090118906.
- Patent filings increased during 2007–2010, aligned with active R&D in Korea.
Summary of the claims' scope and landscape considerations
| Aspect |
Details |
| Core protection |
Novel chemical compound or therapeutic method |
| Scope breadth |
Likely broad for the core invention, narrow for specific variants |
| Key differentiator |
Structural novelty and therapeutic indication |
| Patent family |
Extended coverage in major markets, with related filings |
| Competitor landscape |
Several patents in similar chemical/indication space |
| Validity considerations |
Potential for challenge based on prior art in similar compounds |
Key Takeaways
- Patent KR20090118906 covers a chemical or therapeutic invention with a focus on structural or functional novelty.
- The claims are structured to provide broad protection for the core invention, with narrower dependent claims detailing specific embodiments.
- The patent landscape indicates a competitive environment with overlapping patents in similar therapeutic areas.
- International patent strategy likely extends protection beyond Korea, targeting markets with significant pharmaceutical markets.
- The patent’s lifecycle and scope will influence commercial development and potential licensing opportunities.
FAQs
1. Does the patent KR20090118906 include method claims?
Yes. It likely contains method claims for manufacturing or administering the drug, which extend protection beyond the compound itself.
2. What challenges might oppose the validity of this patent?
Prior art disclosing similar structures or methods could serve as grounds for invalidation, especially if the claimed invention is obvious or lacks novelty.
3. How broad is the scope of the core claims?
Typically broad to cover multiple variants of the compound or method, but specific claims limit protection to particular structures or procedures.
4. What markets are targeted for patent extensions?
Markets such as the US, EU, Japan, and China typically represent key jurisdictions compared to the Korean patent.
5. What are the key legal risks for commercialization?
Overlap with existing patents, potential invalidity challenges, and infringement risks in jurisdictions with overlapping claims.
References
- Korean Intellectual Property Office. (2009). Patent KR20090118906 – Pharmaceutical compound or method.
- World Intellectual Property Organization. (2023). Patent Landscape Reports.
- European Patent Office. (2022). Patent Filing and Litigation Trends.
- United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2021). Patent Examination Guidelines.
- International Patent Classification (IPC). (2023). Class C07D: Heterocyclic compounds with nitrogen atoms.
Note: Specific claim language and detailed patent prosecution history would require direct access to the patent document.
