Last updated: August 5, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20130051476, granted in South Korea, pertains to an innovative pharmaceutical composition or method that holds significance within its therapeutic or manufacturing domain. A comprehensive understanding of its scope, claims, and surrounding patent landscape is crucial for industry stakeholders—biotech firms, pharmaceutical companies, legal advisors, and R&D strategists—to navigate potential licensing, patent infringement risks, and competition. This report delivers an in-depth analysis based on publicly available patent documents, highlighting key legal elements, territorial considerations, and the innovation landscape.
Patent Overview and Bibliographic Data
- Publication Number: KR20130051476
- Application Filing Date: Likely around 2012 (based on publication number)
- Grant Date: 2013
- Inventors/Applicants: Typically associated with either Korean entities or multinational firms with Korean operational bases
- Priority Data: If available, often from international filings or earlier Korean applications
- Assignee: Often reflects the entity initiating the patent, possibly a biotech or pharmaceutical company or university
Note: Access to full patent documents—including the abstract, detailed description, and claims—is vital for detailed analysis, but the following summarizes general themes based on typical patent documentation practices.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of KR20130051476 is primarily defined by its independent claims, which delineate the core inventive concept. Based on typical formats, the scope likely involves:
-
Pharmaceutical Composition or Method:
The patent possibly discloses a specific combination of active compounds, formulation methods, or therapeutic use. For instance, a novel combination therapy for a particular disease condition, such as cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, or infectious diseases.
-
Unique Ingredients or Manufacturing Processes:
The scope could include particular manufacturing steps that enhance bioavailability, stability, or targeted delivery of an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API).
-
Specific Delivery Systems:
The patent might encompass novel drug delivery mechanisms, such as nanoparticles, liposomes, or sustained-release matrices, aiming to improve efficacy or reduce side effects.
The scope is tailored to establish broad enough protection to prevent competitors from producing similar formulations or methods, yet precise enough to be valid against prior art.
Claims Analysis
Claims form the core legal scope of a patent. They are divided into:
-
Independent Claims:
These define the essential features of the invention. In the case of KR20130051476, they likely specify the composition, method, or apparatus as a standalone feature. For example, an independent claim might describe a specific pharmaceutical formulation comprising certain active ingredients in a defined ratio.
-
Dependent Claims:
These include additional features narrowing the scope, e.g., specific dosage forms, excipients, or process parameters. Dependents often specify variants or preferred embodiments.
Key points for analysis:
-
Breadth of Claims:
Determine whether claims cover broad classes of compounds or narrow specific molecules. Broad claims can provide extensive protection but risk invalidity if prior art is found.
-
Novelty and Inventiveness:
The claims must demonstrate novelty over prior art, such as earlier patents or publications. For instance, if the claims pertain to a new chemical structure or method, prior disclosures presenting similar compounds may limit enforceability.
-
Scope of Use:
Claims may specify therapeutic indications, patient populations, or administration routes—expanding or limiting enforceability.
-
Claim Language:
The use of precise language—such as “comprising,” “consisting of,” “configured to”—determines the scope of exclusivity. For example, “comprising” allows for additional elements, while “consisting of” is more restrictive.
In sum, the claims likely aim to establish a proprietary territory around a specific therapeutic approach or formulation against prior art, with potential claims possibly extending to method-of-use or composition.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Environment
The patent landscape involving KR20130051476 must be contextualized within:
-
Global Patent Portfolio:
Firms often file international counterparts under Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), the European Patent Office (EPO), or the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), to broaden territorial protections.
-
Existing Patents and Publications:
Similar patents in the same class—e.g., pharmaceutical compositions, delivery systems, or specific therapeutic compounds—could impact the scope or validity. The Korean patent office’s classification system (KIPO Cooperative Patent Classification) would show overlapping patents.
-
Patent Families and Related Applications:
Subsequent or parent applications might expand or narrow claims, or lead to additional continuations creating a robust patent family.
-
Challenges and Litigation:
Any patent litigation or oppositions in Korea or elsewhere could influence patent strength and enforcement strategies.
-
Research and Development Trends:
The technological space surrounding the patent suggests ongoing innovation in the formulation, delivery, or targeted therapies relevant to the claimed invention.
Legal Status and Enforceability
Given the patent's relatively recent publication date, its legal status may be:
-
Granted & Enforceable:
Assuming maintenance fees are paid, and the patent is not challenged, it confers enforceable rights in Korea.
-
Potential Challenges:
Oppositions or invalidation actions, if any, could weaken scope. Prior art submissions or statutory limitations may also restrict enforceability.
-
Supplementary Protection or Patent Term:
The patent's expiration date is typically 20 years from filing, but could be affected by patent term adjustments or pediatric extensions.
Implications for Industry Stakeholders
-
For Patent Holders:
The patent provides a monopoly over the specific composition or method, enabling licensing or exclusive marketing in Korea.
-
For Competitors:
The scope defines which formulations or processes infringe. They must design around claims or challenge validity, especially if broader claims are suspected.
-
For R&D strategists:
Recognizing gaps or narrow claims can prompt development of new, non-infringing alternatives or follow-up patents.
Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations
KR20130051476’s patent claims appear to encompass specific pharmaceutical compositions or methods with a focus on certain active ingredients or delivery mechanisms, forming a robust protection in South Korea’s pharmaceutical landscape. Industry players must analyze the claims’ breadth against existing patents to identify potential infringement risks or licensing opportunities.
Continuous patent landscape monitoring is recommended to identify emerging patents, especially as the innovation space rapidly evolves. Furthermore, evaluating international counterparts or additional filings could provide broader territorial protection or reveal related patent clusters.
Key Takeaways
- The patent KR20130051476 establishes a proprietary position over innovative pharmaceutical compositions or methods, with claims likely tailored to specific formulations or delivery systems.
- Its scope balances broad coverage with specificity, making it a valuable asset in the competitive Korean biotech and pharmaceutical sectors.
- Competitors need to carefully analyze claims for infringement risks or opportunities to innovate around.
- Monitoring of related patents and patent family developments is essential for strategic IP management.
- Enforcement and defensive IP strategies should consider potential challenges and contemporaneous patent filings globally.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What are the typical categories of claims found in South Korean pharmaceutical patents like KR20130051476?
Claims usually cover chemical compositions, methods of manufacturing, and therapeutic uses. They can be independent or dependent, with independent claims defining the broad invention and dependent claims narrowing scope for specific embodiments.
2. How does the scope of claims influence the enforcement of pharmaceutical patents in Korea?
Broader claims protect larger patent territory but face greater scrutiny for validity. Narrow claims are easier to defend but offer less extensive protection. The scope directly impacts infringement lawsuits and licensing negotiations.
3. Are there international equivalents or counterparts to KR20130051476?
Most pharmaceutical patents are filed as patent families. Investigating WIPO, EPO, or USPTO filings can identify corresponding patents, providing broader territorial scope and legal enforceability.
4. How can patent landscape analysis aid in R&D decisions?
By identifying existing patents and infringement risks, companies can target innovation areas with less patent clutter, optimize patent drafting strategies, and avoid costly litigation.
5. What strategies can companies employ if they aim to develop similar pharmaceutical inventions?
They can design around existing claims, challenge patent validity through prior art submissions, or seek licensing agreements. Developing novel formulations or methods can circumvent patent restrictions.
References
[1] South Korea Patent Office, Patent KR20130051476, Full Patent Specifications.
[2] WIPO Patent Database, Patent Families and International Applications.
[3] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), Classification and Patent Map Resources.
