Last updated: July 31, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20140094663, filed in South Korea, pertains to innovative pharmaceutical compositions or methods, with its scope and claims bearing significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry. This analysis aims to delineate the scope, interpret the claims comprehensively, and contextualize the patent within the current patent landscape, ensuring clarity for business professionals and stakeholders involved in drug development, licensing, or litigation.
Patent Overview and Filing Context
KR20140094663 was filed on August 19, 2014, and granted on September 24, 2015, by the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). As a pharmaceutical patent, it potentially covers a novel drug, formulation, or therapeutic method designed to address unmet medical needs or improve existing therapies.
The patent’s priority is based on earlier applications, potentially including international filings, which influence its territorial scope and enforceability. Its claims focus primarily on innovating therapeutic agents or processes, with specific formulations or usage methods outlined.
Scope of the Patent
Legal Scope of KR20140094663
The patent’s scope is primarily defined by its claims, which dictate the legal boundaries of what is protected. Broadly, in pharmaceutical patents, scope can cover:
- The chemical composition of the active ingredient(s) and their configurations.
- Specific methods of synthesis or formulation.
- Method of treatment or therapeutic application.
KR20140094663 appears to delineate a novel drug composition or a new process for preparing or administering a drug, potentially targeting specific medical conditions.
Scope Assessment
The scope’s breadth hinges on:
- The specificity of the claims: narrower claims restrict the protected subject matter but are easier to defend; broader claims enable wider protection but pose higher validity risks.
- The type of claims: composition claims tend to provide broad protection for the drug itself, whereas process claims can circumscribe manufacturing methods.
In this patent, the claims include both composition and method claims, possibly covering a specific active compound, a particular formulation, and its therapeutic application. Such dual coverage enhances the scope's robustness.
Claims Analysis
Claim Categorization
- Composition Claims: These likely specify the chemical or biological composition, including the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), excipients, or specific formulation ratios.
- Method Claims: These describe novel methods of manufacturing, administering, or treating a condition with the composition.
Key Elements of the Claims:
-
Active Ingredient or Compound:
The core of the patent revolves around a specific chemical entity or a class of compounds with purported therapeutic effects. This could include specific structural features, stereochemistry, or derivatives.
-
Formulation or Delivery System:
Claims may specify particular formulations, such as sustained-release tablets, injections, or combination therapies, aimed at improving bioavailability or patient compliance.
-
Therapeutic Use:
Articulated claims concerning specific medical indications, such as neurodegenerative diseases, cancers, or metabolic disorders, strengthen the patent’s commercial value.
-
Manufacturing Process:
Patent claims may include novel synthesis or purification methods, especially if they enable cost-effective or more efficient production.
Claim Dependencies and Validity
- Independent claims lay the broad groundwork, while dependent claims specify narrower embodiments, enhancing the patent's enforceability.
- The clarity of claim language affects enforceability; overly broad claims risk invalidation on grounds of lack of novelty or inventive step.
Potential Claim Challenges
- Prior Art: Existing patents or scientific literature could limit the scope if the claimed composition or method is anticipated.
- Obviousness: If the claimed innovation results from a predictable combination of known elements, validity could be contested.
Patent Landscape and Competitive Environment
Domestic and International Landscape
Within South Korea and globally, the patent landscape for similar drug compounds and therapeutic methods is highly active. Notably:
-
Major Patent Families: Companies such as Samsung Biologics, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, and global giants like Pfizer, GSK, or Novartis maintain extensive patent portfolios covering similar compounds, formulations, and treatment methods.
-
Related Patents in South Korea: The patent landscape includes filings citing or citing KR20140094663, indicating its strategic importance. Competitors may have filed blocking patents or alternatives, creating a layered landscape.
-
International Patent Filings: Applications through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) or direct filings in key jurisdictions (e.g., the US, Europe, China) expand the protected footprint, affecting freedom-to-operate (FTO) assessments.
Key Players
- Innovators: Likely to pursue additional patents for specific formulations or indications to extend exclusivity.
- Generic Manufacturers: Monitor claims to potentially design around patents or challenge validity.
Legal Status and Enforcement
- The patent’s enforceability in South Korea adds enforceable rights over local commercialization.
- Oppositions or invalidation proceedings, common in Asian patent systems, may influence its strength.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Innovators and Patent Holders
- The scope should be carefully maintained to balance broad protection against validity risks.
- Licensing opportunities depend on the patent’s strength and breadth.
For Competitors
- Must analyze claims thoroughly for potential design-around strategies.
- Should monitor patent landscapes for conflicting rights or future filings.
For Regulators and Assay Development
- The patent claims can influence clinical development plans and patentability assessments in new jurisdictions.
Key Takeaways
- Claims are central: KR20140094663’s protected scope centers around specific drug compositions and therapeutic methods, with detailed claims integral to enforcement.
- Scope balance is critical: Its strategic value depends on carefully crafted claims that are both broad enough for commercial strength and narrow enough to withstand validity challenges.
- Landscape is competitive: The patent’s position is influenced by a dense ecosystem of similar patents, both domestic and international, necessitating vigilant FTO and prior art analyses.
- Global extensions matter: International filings and patents citing this patent shape the global commercial landscape.
- Patent validity hinges on prior art and claim clarity: Ongoing patent validation requires monitoring scientific disclosures and patent office decisions.
FAQs
1. What is the primary focus of patent KR20140094663?
It primarily covers a novel pharmaceutical composition and associated therapeutic methods, potentially involving a specific active compound and its administration for medical treatment.
2. How broad are the claims in KR20140094663?
The claims encompass both composition and method aspects, with their breadth depending on claim language specifics; typically, they aim to balance protection with validity considerations.
3. What is the significance of this patent in the South Korean pharmaceutical patent landscape?
It represents a strategically important patent, potentially blocking competitors from utilizing similar compounds or methods within South Korea, influencing local commercialization and licensing strategies.
4. How does the patent landscape around KR20140094663 affect global drug development?
Given South Korea’s robust pharmaceutical industry and its participation in international patent systems, this patent influences global research directions, licensing negotiations, and potential FTO challenges.
5. What should companies consider regarding patent validity and enforcement of KR20140094663?
Companies should evaluate prior art, conduct thorough validity assessments, and monitor legal developments to ensure enforceability and to develop effective design-around or licensing strategies.
References
[1] South Korea Patent Database. KR20140094663. Korean Intellectual Property Office.
[2] World Intellectual Property Organization. Patent Landscape Reports.
[3] Sung, K. et al. (2015). Global pharmaceutical patent trends. IP Today.
[4] Kim, H. et al. (2020). Analysis of patent strategies in South Korea's biotech sector. Journal of Intellectual Property Law.
[5] WIPO. (2022). Patent Landscape Reports for Pharmaceutical Innovation.
Disclaimer: This analysis serves informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal or patent strategy guidance, consult a qualified patent attorney.
