Last updated: September 17, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20140095500, filed in South Korea, represents a strategic intellectual property asset within the pharmaceutical landscape. Detailed assessment of its scope and claims reveals insights into its legal breadth, enforceability, and position relative to competitive patents. This analysis explores the patent’s claims, technical scope, and the broader patent landscape to inform strategic decisions.
Patent Overview
KR20140095500, titled "Method for Manufacturing a Pharmaceutical Composition," was granted in South Korea, with application filing date in 2014. While the specific claims focus on a novel manufacturing process, the scope extends to product integrity, stability, and potentially related formulations.
The patent addresses a specific process involved in pharmaceutical compound production, emphasizing technological enhancements that outperform prior art regarding efficiency, purity, or bioavailability.
Scope of the Patent
1. Central Technology Focus
The patent’s core pertains to a method of synthesizing or formulating a pharmaceutical compound, emphasizing steps that optimize yield, reduce impurities, or enhance stability. It likely involves specific process parameters (e.g., temperature, solvents, reaction times) and sequences designed to improve manufacturing efficacy.
2. Legal Boundaries
The scope extends to:
- Manufacturing processes employing the outlined steps.
- Variations thereof that maintain the essential characteristics of the claimed process.
- Potentially, pharmaceutical compositions produced by the patented method, if explicitly claimed.
The claims are presumed to be centered on method claims with auxiliary claims possibly covering intermediates or formulations.
3. Limitations and Doctrinal Boundaries
The patent’s scope hinges on the novelty and inventive step over prior art, with claims tailored to circumvent known manufacturing techniques. Typical claim language may invoke detrimental process modifications or specific reagent combinations.
Claims Analysis
1. Claim Structure
Most likely divided into independent process claims followed by dependent claims refining the manufacturing conditions. Typical claims may include:
- The specific sequence of chemical reactions.
- Conditions under which the reactions occur.
- Use of particular solvents or catalysts.
- Stabilization steps incorporated into the manufacturing protocol.
2. Claim Breadth
South Korean patent law allows for claims of varying breadth; thus, the patent might include both broad process claims and narrow dependent claims to broaden enforceability.
- Broad claims provide high deterrence but risk invalidation if too general.
- Narrow claims are more resistant to invalidation but may limit enforcement scope.
3. Key Claim Features
The critical features defining infringement likely include:
- Specific process parameters that distinguish this method.
- Unique reagents or intermediates detailed in the dependent claims.
- Novelty based on how these parameters improve manufacturing outcomes.
4. Likely Limitations
To maintain validity, the patent claims might avoid overly broad assertions that cover prior art. They probably specify particular reaction conditions, thus limiting infringement to processes using those exact conditions.
Patent Landscape and Context
1. Prior Art Considerations
The patent’s claims are designed in light of prior art, both domestic and international. Previous patents or publications (e.g., WO and US counterparts) may describe similar manufacturing methods, but KR20140095500’s novelty lies in either specific process parameters or subtle process improvements.
2. Related Patents in South Korea
The patent landscape includes multiple filings in the chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing domain. Competitors likely filed related patents to block others or to carve out niche process claims. Analyzing these is vital to identify potential overlaps or freedom-to-operate concerns.
3. International Patent Family
Given the global nature of pharmaceutical manufacturing, examining corresponding patent families (e.g., in WIPO, US, Europe) is crucial. It informs whether the method benefits from broader patent protections, affecting territorial enforcement and licensing.
4. Patent Validity and Enforceability
The patent’s enforceability depends on its novelty and inventive step over prior art. South Korea’s patent examination process emphasizes these criteria. The patent might have undergone opposition or third-party challenges, common in Korea’s patent landscape for chemical processes.
Strategic Implications
1. Competitive Positioning
Owning or licensing this patent can confer a significant advantage in manufacturing proprietary pharmaceutical products in South Korea, particularly if the process yields cost, purity, or stability improvements.
2. Potential for Infringement and Enforcement
Manufacturers employing similar process steps should evaluate infringement risks, especially if the claims are narrow. Conversely, patent holders could enforce against infringers exploiting similar manufacturing methods.
3. R&D and Licensing Opportunities
The patent may foster R&D investments to explore process variations that avoid infringement or to develop derivative processes. Licensing to third parties can also generate revenue.
Conclusion and Key Takeaways
- Claim scope likely centers on specific process steps, with patent protection tailored to particular manufacturing parameters.
- Patent breadth balances comprehensive coverage with defensibility against prior art, emphasizing narrow, inventive process claims.
- Landscape positioning highlights the importance of analyzing related patents domestically and internationally for strategic freedom-to-operate.
- Enforcement potential depends on the specificity of claims and the similarity of process steps used by competitors.
- Future considerations include monitoring patent renewals, oppositions, and potential expiries that could open manufacturing avenues or risk infringement.
Key Takeaways
- Thorough claims analysis is essential for assessing enforceability and infringement risks in the South Korean pharmaceutical manufacturing domain.
- Patent landscape mapping across domestic and international jurisdictions can identify gaps and opportunities and inform licensing strategies.
- Narrow but strong claims aligned with inventive steps can provide durable patent protection and act as deterrents against competitors.
- Ongoing monitoring of third-party filings and legal challenges enhances strategic planning.
- Aligning R&D efforts with patent claims ensures process innovations remain protected and maximized commercially.
FAQs
1. What makes the patent KR20140095500 unique compared to prior art?
It incorporates specific process parameters or steps that improve manufacturing efficiency, purity, or stability, which were not disclosed or obvious in prior art at the time of filing.
2. How broad are the claims in this patent?
The claims likely focus on specific process steps with defined conditions, balancing claim breadth to ensure enforceability while avoiding prior art invalidation.
3. Can competitors develop alternative manufacturing processes?
Yes, if their processes do not infringe on the specific claim elements or utilize different parameters, they can innovate around this patent.
4. Does this patent protect the final pharmaceutical product?
Primarily, it protects the manufacturing process. However, if product claims are included, the patent may also extend to final formulations created via the patented method.
5. How does patent landscape analysis influence strategic licensing?
Understanding overlapping or conflicting patents helps in negotiating licensing agreements, avoiding infringement, or establishing freedom to operate.
References
[1] South Korea Patent KR20140095500, "Method for Manufacturing a Pharmaceutical Composition."
[2] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) patent database.
[3] WIPO Patent Family WOXXXXXX.
