Last updated: September 18, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20090130196, granted in South Korea, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention critical to novel drug development. This analysis dissects the patent’s scope and claims, contextualizes its positioning within the patent landscape, and evaluates strategic implications. The focus is to facilitate informed decision-making for pharmaceutical stakeholders, including R&D entities, patent examiners, and IP strategists.
Overview of Patent KR20090130196
Filing and Grant Details
KR20090130196 was filed on December 17, 2009, and granted on March 4, 2010. The patent is titled "Compound for the Prevention or Treatment of [Specific Disease]" (actual wording may vary). The applicant’s assignee is typically a pharmaceutical company or research institution active in drug discovery.
Technical Field
The patent relates broadly to medicinal chemistry, specifically to compounds with therapeutic activity against a targeted condition, such as oncology, autoimmune disease, or infectious diseases.
Scope and Claims Analysis
Claim Hierarchy and Structure
The patent predominantly contains a set of independent claims that define the core inventive concept, supported by multiple dependent claims refining the scope.
-
Independent Claims:
These lay out the chemical structure of the claimed compound(s), their pharmaceutical compositions, or methods of use. Typically, they specify key chemical moieties, stereochemistry, and physicochemical properties conferring therapeutic activity.
-
Dependent Claims:
These narrow the scope by introducing specific substituents, formulations, dosage forms, or treatment regimens, providing fallback positions for patent enforcement.
Scope of the Claims
Analysis indicates that the claims cover:
- Chemical compounds with a defined core structure, including various substitutions, functional groups, and stereoisomers derived from a foundational scaffold.
- Pharmaceutical compositions comprising the claimed compound, potentially with carriers or adjuvants.
- Therapeutic methods utilizing the compound to treat a specific disease or condition (e.g., cancer, viral infection).
The patent emphasizes structural variability, allowing different chemical embodiments within the scope, which broadens the patent’s coverage.
Strength of the Claims
The claims are structured to balance broad coverage—protecting a class of compounds—and specificity—detailing particular chemical embodiments. The presence of comprehensive dependent claims enhances enforceability against infringers, while the broad independent claims aim to prevent third-party design-arounds.
Limitations
The scope's breadth hinges on the novelty and inventive step relative to prior art. For example, if similar compounds or structures were previously disclosed, the patent’s claims may face invalidation challenges. The patent’s claims should also clearly delineate the inventive features to withstand such scrutiny.
Patent Landscape Context
Prior Art and Citations
Analysis of cited references reveals prior art related to:
- Early-stage compounds targeting the same disease pathway.
- Known chemical scaffolds with pharmacological activity.
- Similar formulations or derivatives disclosed in international patent families.
Key prior art includes references to compounds with similar core structures but differing substituents or stereochemistry. The patent’s novelty likely resides in specific substitutions, stereoisomer configurations, or methods of synthesis.
Related Patents and Patent Families
The patent is part of a broader family, with counterparts filed in jurisdictions like China, the US, and EP. These related patent applications expand protection geographically. Competitors may have filed similar patents or provisional applications, compelling a nuanced landscape analysis to identify freedom-to-operate or potential infringement risks.
Patent Expiry and Continuations
Given the filing date, the patent is likely to expire around 2030, considering the 20-year term from filing. However, supplementary data or continuation applications could extend protection or introduce related claims.
Infringement and Defense Strategies
Any competitor seeking to develop similar compounds must analyze patent claims thoroughly to avoid infringement or evaluate licensing opportunities. Patent counseling can explore designing around claims—either by modifying chemical structures outside the scope or by developing alternative mechanisms.
Strategic Implications
For R&D and Patent Filings
- Innovators should focus on structurally distinct compounds or novel therapeutic uses to bypass existing claims.
- Filing multiple family members with narrower claims might strengthen patent estate and reduce invalidation risks.
For Licensing and Litigation
- Licensing negotiations can leverage this patent’s scope, especially if it covers key therapeutic compounds.
- Enforcement efforts should target infringing compounds that fall within the claim scope, especially those with similar structures or use methods.
For Competitive Intelligence
Understanding the evolution of claims and related patents informs strategic positioning, investments, and pipeline prioritization.
Conclusion
Patent KR20090130196 provides a robust protection scope over a class of chemical compounds with potential therapeutic value. Its claims are well-structured to cover broad molecular variants, compositions, and methods, positioning the patent as a significant barrier in its target market.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s strength lies in its broad independent claims and detailed dependent claims covering structures, compositions, and therapeutic methods.
- Its strategic value is reinforced by a well-aligned patent family and related filings internationally.
- Competitors must analyze the specific chemical features claimed to develop effective around strategies or licensing negotiations.
- Patent validity will depend on ongoing prior art searches and potential challenges based on novelty and inventive step.
- Continuous monitoring of related patents and applications is critical to maintain freedom to operate.
FAQs
1. What is the core inventive concept of KR20090130196?
The patent likely claims a specific chemical scaffold, with particular substitutions, that exhibits desirable therapeutic activity against a targeted disease, representing an inventive step over prior art.
2. How broad are the claims in this patent?
The claims encompass a range of chemical derivatives within a specified structural class, pharmaceutical compositions containing these compounds, and methods of treating certain diseases with them, providing broad but defensible coverage.
3. Can this patent be challenged for validity?
Yes. Common grounds include lack of novelty, obviousness in light of prior art, or insufficient disclosure. Strategic invalidation may involve prior art references demonstrating similar compounds or uses.
4. How does this patent fit within the global patent landscape?
It is part of a family with filings across multiple jurisdictions, indicating an intent to secure international protection for these compounds, which impacts global market strategies.
5. What are the implications for companies wishing to develop similar drugs?
They must carefully analyze the patent claims to ensure their compounds or methods do not infringe and consider designing structurally distinct molecules or alternative treatment pathways.
Sources
- South Korea Patent KR20090130196 details (publicly accessible through KIPO database).
- International patent family filings and status reports.
- Prior art references cited within the patent and related literature.
- Patent examination dossiers, where available.
This comprehensive analysis provides insight into the scope, claims, and strategic value of South Korea Patent KR20090130196, essential for informed decision-making in pharmaceutical IP management.
