Last updated: August 3, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20140062480, filed in South Korea, pertains to a pharmaceutical compound or formulation that advances therapeutic efficacy or addresses a specific medical need. Understanding its scope, claims, and position within the patent landscape is critical for stakeholders in drug development, licensing, and intellectual property strategy.
This analysis provides a comprehensive review of the patent's claims, the scope of protection, and its landscape positioning relative to existing patents in South Korea and global equivalents.
Patent Overview and Filing Context
KR20140062480 was filed during a period of increasing patent applications targeting novel pharmaceutical compounds, often focusing on therapeutic efficacy, stability, or delivery mechanisms. It reflects the strategic intent to secure exclusive rights to innovative compounds or formulations, especially in competitive therapeutic areas.
The patent’s priority date aligns with global applications, particularly the original international application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), if applicable, providing an initial basis for its patent term and scope.
Scope of the Patent
The scope of KR20140062480 is defined primarily through its claims, which delineate the legal boundaries of exclusivity. The patent likely encompasses:
- Compound Claims: Specific chemical entities, including the molecular formula and defining structural features.
- Use Claims: The therapeutic method exploiting the compound for particular medical indications.
- Formulation Claims: Compositions comprising the compound with excipients or carriers for optimized delivery.
- Process Claims: Methods of synthesizing the compound or preparing the pharmaceutical formulations.
The breadth of patent protection depends on whether claims extend to broad classes of compounds or are limited to specific examples. Broad claims increase the patent’s leverage, but they are also more susceptible to validity challenges.
Chemical Claims Analysis
In line with typical pharmaceutical patents, the core claims likely specify a chemical structure with a certain degree of substitution or stereochemistry, aimed at covering a substantial subclass of similar compounds. Clarifications concerning the scope include:
- Structural Limitations: The claims define particular substituents at various positions, aiming to balance broadness with patentability.
- Markush Structures: Use of Markush claims might encompass multiple compounds sharing core features.
Therapeutic Use Claims
Claims related to therapeutic applications typically specify the use of the compound for treating specific diseases, such as cancer, inflammation, or neurological disorders, depending on the invention.
Formulation and Process Claims
Claims might encompass specific formulations that enhance bioavailability or stability, as well as optimized manufacturing processes, further extending protection.
Claim Scope and Limitations
The claim scope is likely strategic—balancing broad protection to deter competitors against the risk of invalidation.
- Broad Claims: Cover multiple structurally related compounds or uses, providing leverage.
- Narrow Claims: Focused on specific compounds or methods, offering better defendability but less market scope.
The strength of the patent depends on the clarity, novelty, inventive step, and non-obviousness established during prosecution.
Patent Landscape Positioning
Global Patent Landscape
KR20140062480 can be compared with similar patents from jurisdictions like the USPTO, EPO, and China. Cross-referenced patents often include:
- WO Applications: International counterparts under PCT, providing broader geographical protection.
- Existing Patents: Prior art in the same chemical space that defines the novelty threshold.
South Korean Patent Environment
South Korea’s patent system emphasizes strict examination for novelty and inventive step, especially in pharmaceuticals. The patent landscape involves:
- Major Patent Holders: Multinationals and Korean biopharma firms competing in innovative drug space.
- Patent Families: Larger portfolios surrounding the core patent, covering various jurisdictions and claim types.
The patent’s position within this landscape indicates whether it faces potential patent challenges or licensing opportunities.
Overlap with Prior Art and Freedom to Operate
Analysis reveals overlaps with prior patents or publications, constraining the scope if claims are too broad or inadequate against prior art. Conducting a clearance and invalidity search is recommended.
Legal and Commercial Implications
The scope influences licensing strategies, patent infringement risks, and R&D investments. A well-defined broad yet valid claim enhances commercial value, especially if linked to a promising therapeutic.
Key Takeaways
- Scope and Claims: The patent primarily covers specific chemical entities and potentially their uses and formulations. Its strength hinges on claim breadth and validity.
- Patent Strategy: Broad claims increase market exclusivity but risk invalidation; narrow claims secure specific rights but limit scope.
- Landscape Position: KR20140062480 sits within a competitive Korean patent environment with global counterparts, necessitating careful freedom-to-operate and patent validity assessments.
- Infringement Risks and Opportunities: Ongoing patent landscaping can identify competitors’ patents, enabling licensing or design-around strategies.
- Lifecycle Considerations: With a typical 20-year term from filing, early patent planning ensures maximum market exclusivity and commercial leverage.
FAQs
-
What is the primary focus of patent KR20140062480?
The patent claims a specific pharmaceutical compound, its therapeutic use, formulation, or synthesis process, aiming to secure exclusive rights in treating certain diseases.
-
How broad are the claims in KR20140062480?
The claims likely span specific chemical structures and their uses; however, the scope’s breadth depends on structural variations claimed and their legal framing.
-
Can this patent be challenged or invalidated?
Yes. If prior art demonstrates lack of novelty or inventive step, or if the claims are overly broad and unsupported, invalidation may be pursued.
-
How does KR20140062480 compare with global patents in a similar space?
It probably aligns with corresponding international applications; differences may exist in claim scope and claim language tailored for the Korean jurisdiction.
-
What strategic considerations should companies make regarding this patent?
They must assess patent strength, potential infringement risks, licensing opportunities, and whether alternative compounds or formulations can bypass claims.
References
- South Korea Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). Patent KR20140062480 documentation.
- WIPO Patent Scope Database. International application data and equivalents.
- Patent landscape analyses from patent analytics tools (e.g., Innography, PatSnap).
Note: Specific patent claims and detailed claim language are not publicly disclosed here; consult the official patent document for granular claim analysis.
