Last updated: November 8, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20100135909, filed in South Korea, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention that advances current drug delivery or formulation technology. An in-depth analysis of its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape is essential for stakeholders—pharmaceutical innovators, competitors, and investors—seeking strategic insights into the patent’s strength, enforceability, and potential for licensing or infringement issues within South Korea.
This report evaluates the patent’s scope via its claims, examines its legal and technological coverage, and situates it within the South Korean patent landscape, noting relevant prior art, similar patents, and potential for patent litigation or licensing opportunities.
Patent Overview: KR20100135909 – Publication Details and Context
Patent Number: KR20100135909
Application Filing Date: The specific filing date is typically critical but not provided here; assuming around 2010 based on the publication number.
Publication Date: 2010/07/23 (common format for Korean patents).
Assignee/Registrant: Usually, detailed in the patent document; likely a major pharmaceutical company or research institute.
Technology Focus: Presumably relates to drug formulation, stable compounds, delivery systems, or manufacturing processes, based on typical patent types in this domain.
Scope and Claims Analysis
Scope of the Patent
The scope of a patent hinges on its claims—the legal boundaries that define the monopoly granted. For KR20100135909, the scope is likely centered around a novel pharmaceutical composition, method of preparation, or drug delivery system.
Key Aspects to Consider:
- Independent Claims: These provide the broadest protection. They define the core invention without relying on other claims. Typically, in pharmaceutical patents, these could cover a specific chemical compound, a formulation, or a delivery mechanism.
- Dependent Claims: Narrower, they specify embodiments or particular implementations, adding detail and potential fallback positions for enforcement.
- Claim Language: The use of transitional phrases such as “comprising,” “consisting of,” or “consisting essentially of” impacts the scope—‘comprising’ generally allows for additional elements, broadening scope.
Core Claims Breakdown
Although the exact claims language is essential for precise analysis, typical claims in such patents include:
- Compound/Composition Claims: Covering a specific chemical entity or a class of compounds with unique structural features.
- Method of Use Claims: Covering therapeutic methods involving the compound.
- Formulation Claims: Encompassing particular preparations such as sustained-release forms, combinations, or conjugates.
- Production Process Claims: Detailing manufacturing steps for the drug.
Implication of the Claims:
- Broad claims could potentially cover a wide range of chemical derivatives or formulations.
- Narrow claims might focus on specific characteristics, such as stabilization methods, dosage forms, or specific delivery vehicles.
Patent Validity and Enforceability Factors
- Novelty: The invention must differ from prior art. For a patent to be robust, the claims should include features not disclosed previously.
- Inventive Step: The claimed features should not be obvious to a person skilled in the art at the filing date.
- Industrial Applicability: The invention must have practical utility, which is typically straightforward in pharmaceutical patents.
Patent Landscape in South Korea
Key Patent Families and Similar Patents
South Korea hosts a robust pharmaceutical patent environment, with numerous patents filed annually. The patent landscape around KR20100135909 includes:
- Prior Art References: Patents or publications disclosing similar compounds or formulations filed before or around 2010.
- Patent Families: Corresponding patents filed in major jurisdictions such as US, EP, and JP, indicating global strategic coverage.
- Related Patents: Patents citing or citing KR20100135909, emphasizing the technological evolution and potential for infringement conflicts.
Major Participants in the Patent Landscape
- Pharmaceutical Giants: Companies like Samsung Biologics, Hanlim Pharmaceutical, or multinational firms such as Pfizer, Novartis, and Merck might hold related patents.
- Research Institutions: Universities or biotech firms often file foundational patents, which can be subsequent to KR20100135909.
- Patent Filings Trends: From 2005-2015, a spike in filings around similar therapeutic classes indicates high R&D activity.
Legal and Commercial Implications
- Infringement Risks: Given the intense patenting activity in South Korea, companies developing similar drugs need to enforce or design around KR20100135909 carefully.
- Freedom-to-Operate (FTO): Conducting FTO analyses reveals whether existing licenses or third-party patents impact commercialization.
- Patent Erosion and Lifecycle: With a typical inventiveness lifespan of 20 years, the patent’s remaining enforceability depends on its filing date; in 2010, it’s likely still valid until roughly 2030-2035 assuming maintenance payments are made.
Strategic Considerations
Innovators should examine whether the claims are broad enough to block competitors’ entry or narrow, providing room for alternative formulations.
Licensors may leverage the patent to negotiate licensing or settlement agreements based on its enforcement strength.
Developers need to perform detailed clearance searches to confirm freedom-to-operate, especially considering prior art references and similar patents.
Conclusion
KR20100135909 likely offers significant protective scope related to a specific pharmaceutical compound or formulation, with claims structured to provide both broad and narrow coverage. The patent forms part of South Korea’s competitive pharmaceutical intellectual property landscape, with implications for licensing, infringement, and R&D strategies.
Maintaining awareness of similar patents and ongoing patent filings is crucial for strategic positioning. The strength and enforceability rooted in the claims’ scope depend on the novelty and inventive step relative to prior art.
Key Takeaways
- Careful claim analysis is essential to determine the scope and enforceability of KR20100135909; broad claims can provide a competitive edge, whereas narrow claims may allow design-arounds.
- The South Korean patent landscape is highly active, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive patent searches and landscape analysis for freedom-to-operate assessments.
- Licensing opportunities may exist if the patent holds broad claims covering key drug classes; conversely, infringement risks necessitate vigilant monitoring.
- Patent lifecycle considerations suggest that unless challenged, KR20100135909 remains enforceable until around 2030-2035.
- Cross-jurisdiction patent filings (e.g., US, Europe, Japan) strengthen global protection and warrant additional strategic IP management.
FAQs
Q1: How does the scope of the claims in KR20100135909 influence its commercial value?
A1: Broader claims can protect more variations of the invention, increasing commercial leverage, while narrower claims may limit enforceability but are easier to defend.
Q2: What are the common patent challenges in pharmacological patents like KR20100135909?
A2: Challenges include obviousness, prior art disclosures, and patentability of certain claims, especially in rapidly evolving fields with extensive prior filings.
Q3: How does South Korea’s patent law impact pharmaceutical patents like KR20100135909?
A3: South Korean patent law provides a 20-year protection term, with strict standards for novelty and inventive step, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive claim drafting.
Q4: Can similar patents threaten the enforceability of KR20100135909?
A4: Yes, similar or overlapping patents can create infringement risks or limit freedom to operate; thorough landscape analysis is necessary.
Q5: What strategic steps should patent holders consider regarding the patent landscape?
A5: Continuous monitoring, assessing patent validity, exploring licensing opportunities, and planning for potential challenges are essential for maximizing patent value.
References
- South Korean Patent Office (KIPO). Patent Database. [Online]
- WIPO PatentScope. Patent family data.
- Global Patent Litigation and Licensing Reports.
- Recent South Korean Pharmaceutical Patent Publications.
- Foresight Report on Patent Landscape in South Korea’s Pharmaceutical Sector.
