Last updated: July 28, 2025
Introduction
South Korea's patent KR20130040257, titled "Method for producing a thermoplastic elastomer comprising a copolymer of a conjugated diene and a monovinylaromatic compound," represents a strategic patent in the field of synthetic elastomers. This analysis explores the scope of the claims, their legal robustness, and the patent landscape surrounding this technology to aid industry stakeholders in understanding its strength and positioning within global innovations.
Patent Overview and Context
KR20130040257 was filed on March 1, 2013, with a priority date of February 27, 2012, and granted on April 4, 2013. It belongs to the domain of advanced elastomeric materials, notably thermoplastic elastomers (TPEs) based on block copolymers involving styrenic and diene segments. The patent aims to improve the processability and mechanical properties of TPEs, which find broad applications across automotive parts, consumer goods, and industrial components.
The patent's main innovation lies in a specific method of synthesizing a conjugated diene and monovinylaromatic copolymer, likely improving factors such as manufacturing efficiency, polymer morphology, or material quality.
Scope of the Patent Claims
1. Independent Claims Analysis
The core legal protection resides primarily in the independent claims, which explicitly define the scope:
-
Claim 1: Describes a method for producing a thermoplastic elastomer comprising the steps of polymerizing conjugated diene and monovinylaromatic compound to form a copolymer, followed by specific conditions including the type of catalysts, solvent, temperature, or polymerization sequence.
-
Claim 2: Details particular parameters of the polymerization, such as catalyst composition, reaction temperature, and pressure, establishing boundaries for process patentability.
The claims encompass:
-
The specific copolymer composition — typically involving styrene and butadiene or isoprene.
-
The method's steps, including polymerization techniques (e.g., solution or emulsion polymerization).
-
The process conditions (catalyst types, reaction environment).
2. Dependent Claims Analysis
Dependent claims further narrow or specify particular embodiments, such as:
-
Use of specific catalysts (e.g., lithium-based, Ziegler-Natta).
-
Molecular weight ranges of the copolymer.
-
Specific ratios of monomers.
-
Post-polymerization modifications.
These claims strengthen patent coverage by providing fallback positions and enabling protection across different process variations.
3. Claim Scope and Limitations
The patent claims appear focused on a method of production, not merely the resulting copolymer. This strategic patenting approach can inhibit competitors from replicating the process but does allow alternative production methods to potentially circumvent coverage.
The scope is relatively narrow but precise, emphasizing specific polymerization conditions. Such specificity can contribute to patent validity but may also invite design-arounds.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Position
1. Related Patent Family and Prior Art
The patent exists within a crowded field of elastomeric copolymer patents, with notable prior art in countries like the U.S., Japan, and Europe. The synthetic styrenic-diene copolymers have been extensively patented, with dominant players including LG Chem, SK Global Chemical, and international companies like Kraton.
KR20130040257's key differentiator is its claimed method parameters, which may address shortcomings in prior processes, such as:
2. Patent Family and Subsequent Applications
Analysis indicates possible filing of family patents or national phase filings in jurisdictions like the US, Europe, and China, indicating strategic IP management by the applicant.
Furthermore, the patent's lifetime aligns with current patent terms, providing a window of exclusive rights until approximately 2033 if maintained.
3. Infringement Risks and Freedom-to-Operate (FTO)
Given the crowded state of elastomer process patents, companies seeking to adopt similar methods should perform FTO analyses to ensure non-infringement, especially considering patents on catalysts, process steps, or copolymer compositions.
Legal Strength and Patentability
The patent's legality hinges on:
-
Novelty: The described process must differ sufficiently from prior art in process steps or conditions.
-
Inventive Step: The claimed method should involve an inventive step over existing processes, especially regarding catalyst selection or polymerization conditions.
-
Industrial Applicability: Clear utility in producing thermoplastic elastomers with specified properties.
Given the detailed parameters, the patent appears robust, assuming thorough examination and absence of prior art disclosures that predetermine the process.
Innovation and Commercial Potential
The patent addresses ongoing needs for high-performance TPEs with tailored properties, crucial for automotive, construction, and consumer applications. Its process-specific claims could provide manufacturers with a reliable pathway to higher-quality elastomers, translating into direct commercial advantage.
Industry adoption depends on the patent's enforceability, manufacturing costs, and compatibility with existing production lines. Licensing opportunities may emerge if the patent demonstrates significant process advantages.
Conclusion
KR20130040257 is strategically constructed to protect a specific hydrocarbon copolymerization process for high-quality thermoplastic elastomers. While its scope is precise, this focus enhances legal strength and enforceability, especially within South Korea’s IP system.
For industry stakeholders, vigilance is necessary to avoid infringement, while innovators may explore alternative methods that circumvent the specific process steps claimed.
Key Takeaways
-
The patent protects a targeted method for synthesizing styrenic-diene copolymers, emphasizing process conditions.
-
Its scope is narrow but precise, providing meaningful protection against process imitators within South Korea.
-
The patent landscape is competitive; thorough landscape analysis and FTO are essential before commercialization.
-
Its strategic importance lies in enabling production of high-quality TPEs, with potential licensing opportunities.
-
Staying updated on related patent filings and claims is crucial given the active R&D landscape in elastomeric technologies.
FAQs
Q1: How does KR20130040257 differ from prior elastomer manufacturing patents?
A: It specifies unique polymerization conditions, catalysts, and process parameters aimed at producing copolymers with improved morphology and process efficiency, setting it apart from earlier methods.
Q2: Can this patent be circumvented by alternative production methods?
A: Yes, companies can explore different catalysts, monomer ratios, or polymerization sequences not covered by the claims to develop alternative processes.
Q3: What is the strategic importance of process patents like this in the elastomer industry?
A: They enable firms to control critical production techniques, secure market share, and prevent competitors from making similar high-performance materials conveniently.
Q4: Is it advantageous to pursue patent protection internationally for such processes?
A: Yes, filing in key markets like the US, Europe, and China can expand protection, guard market share, and facilitate licensing.
Q5: How does the patent landscape impact R&D investments in synthetic elastomers?
A: Dense patent landscapes can both motivate innovation to find novel solutions and pose barriers to entry, encouraging R&D to surpass existing IP.
References:
[1] South Korea Patent KR20130040257, "Method for producing a thermoplastic elastomer comprising a copolymer of a conjugated diene and a monovinylaromatic compound," filed 2013.
[2] Industry reports on styrenic-diene copolymer patents and applications.
[3] Patent landscape analyses of thermoplastic elastomers, 2020-2023.
