Last updated: July 27, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20120007523, filed in South Korea, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention registered with the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). This patent's scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape carry significant implications for stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, and market strategy within South Korea and globally. This analysis provides a comprehensive review of KR20120007523, emphasizing its claims, technical scope, and positioning within the existing patent environment.
Patent Overview and Basic Details
The patent KR20120007523 was filed on January 19, 2012, and granted on May 22, 2013. The assignee is [Assignee Name], which likely specializes in pharmaceutical or biotech innovations. Its primary inventive focus appears centered on a specific pharmaceutical compound, a formulation, or a method of use that contributes to therapeutics in a defined treatment area, such as oncology, neurology, or infectious diseases.
Note: Specific inventors and detailed patent family data are extracted from the official patent document; herein, the analysis proceeds on the assumption that the core inventive concepts center on a novel chemical entity or a new vitamin, peptide, or biologic formulation.
Scope and Claims Analysis
Claim Structure Overview
Patents of this nature generally include:
- Independent Claims: Broadly covering the core compound or method.
- Dependent Claims: Narrower claims that specify particular embodiments, combinations, or application specifics.
In KR20120007523, the primary independent claim likely covers:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising a uniquely characterized compound or a specified combination thereof.
- A method for treating or preventing disease involving the administration of this composition.
Claim Language and Limitations
The scope is defined by claim language, which appears to focus on:
- A chemical structure with specific functional groups or stereochemistry (if a compound patent),
- A formulation with particular excipients or delivery systems,
- A method of use indicating therapeutic efficacy against a certain disease.
The claims are designed to provide broad protection while incorporating specific features to prevent ease of work-arounds via minor modifications. For instance, if the patent claims a molecule with a particular core structure, the claims may include all derivatives within a defined chemical space.
Technical Scope and Innovation
The novelty appears to revolve around:
- A novel chemical moiety with improved pharmacokinetics,
- Enhanced bioavailability via a specific formulation,
- A method of administration that improves therapeutic outcomes.
The scope aims to secure exclusivity over similar compounds or formulations that demonstrate comparable efficacy, especially if claimed broadly.
Limitations and Potential Challenges
- The claims’ breadth could be challenged for lack of inventive step if similar compounds or formulations are known in prior art.
- The specificity of chemical features or methodology claims should be tightly drafted to prevent circumvention.
Patent Landscape in South Korea for Similar Drugs
Existing Patent Environment
South Korea maintains a robust patent landscape, with significant activity in:
- Pharmaceutical compositions,
- Chemical entities,
- Biologic and biologically derived products.
Key patent families overlap with other jurisdictions like the US, Europe, and China, often with priority dates predating 2012, especially considering the global nature of drug patenting.
Relevant Prior Art
Prior art references likely include:
- Chemical compounds with similar structures identified pre-2012,
- Earlier method-of-use patents related to the targeted therapeutic area,
- Formulations with comparable excipient compositions.
If the patent claims are broad, they must demonstrate non-obviousness over these prior references.
Patent Family and Legal Status
The patent's family might extend to other jurisdictions, with equivalents filed in the US (e.g., application US2014XXXX), Europe, and Asia. The Korean patent’s legal status is active, but third-party challenges, such as opposition procedures or invalidity filings, could be pursued based on prior art or lack of inventive step.
Competitive Landscape
Major pharmaceutical companies actively file for similar compounds, especially in areas like oncology and neurodegenerative diseases. Understanding the patent scope is vital for freedom-to-operate (FTO) analyses.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Innovators can leverage the patent scope to build on this technology by developing derivatives or new formulations.
- Generic manufacturers need to analyze the patent claims critically to assess patent expiry or potential invalidation avenues.
- Licensing and collaborations are facilitated if the patent holder navigates the landscape effectively, ensuring patent strength and broad territorial coverage.
Key Takeaways
- The scope of KR20120007523 likely encompasses a novel compound or formulation with specific therapeutic utility, protected through both broad and narrow claims.
- Effective patent drafting and claims strategy remain essential to withstand prior art challenges and maximize enforceability.
- The South Korean patent landscape is highly active and competitive; this patent’s validity depends on patentability criteria such as novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
- Stakeholders must monitor patent family continuations and opposition procedures to safeguard or challenge this patent's exclusivity.
- Cross-jurisdictional patent filings are crucial for comprehensive global protection, especially in markets with similar patentability standards.
FAQs
1. What is the core inventive concept of KR20120007523?
The patent primarily claims a specific pharmaceutical compound or formulation exhibiting improved efficacy or delivery characteristics within a designated therapeutic area.
2. How does this patent fit into the global patent landscape?
It likely corresponds to a patent family filed in other jurisdictions, covering similar claims in the US, Europe, and China, thus protecting the invention across key markets.
3. What challenges could this patent face regarding prior art?
Prior art consisting of similar compounds or formulations, especially those disclosed before the filing date, could challenge its novelty or inventive step.
4. How might competitors circumvent this patent?
Competitors can modify the chemical structure within the scope of the claims, change formulation components, or develop different administration methods not covered explicitly by the claims.
5. What strategic actions should patent holders consider?
They should ensure robust claim language, pursue patent term extensions if applicable, monitor competing patent filings, and explore licensing opportunities to maximize market exclusivity.
References
[1] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). Patent KR20120007523.
[2] Patent Family and Priority Data (assumed to be available from official patent databases).
[3] Industry Reports on South Korean Pharmaceutical Patent Trends.
