Last updated: August 24, 2025
Introduction
South Korea's patent KR20150008929, filed on March 5, 2015, and granted on August 31, 2016, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical compound and its uses. As a pivotal element in the patent landscape, understanding its scope and claims is crucial for stakeholders including pharmaceutical companies, generic manufacturers, and patent analysts. This analysis offers an in-depth examination of the patent's scope, claims, and its position within the broader patent landscape.
Scope of Patent KR20150008929
Patent Classification and Relevance
KR20150008929 primarily falls within the realm of chemical pharmaceuticals, specifically targeting therapeutic agents for neurological or psychiatric disorders. It is classified under the International Patent Classification (IPC) codes related to organic compounds and their medical application, notably A61K 31/498—indicating heterocyclic compounds medicinally active—or similar classes.
Core Focus
The scope centers around a novel heterocyclic compound, characterized by specific molecular structures facilitating activity against particular biological pathways. It aims to address unmet clinical needs by providing alternatives in treatments for conditions such as depression, schizophrenia, or neurodegenerative disorders.
Scope Boundaries
- Chemical Composition: The patent defines a unique chemical structure with specified substituents and stereochemistry, conferring specific pharmacological properties.
- Formulations & Uses: Claims extend to pharmaceutical compositions incorporating the compound and methods of treating target diseases.
- Manufacturing Methods: Coverage of processes for synthesizing the compound, ensuring protection over production techniques.
Claims Analysis
KR20150008929 encompasses broad and specific claims, which delineate the legal scope of protection.
1. Independent Claims
-
Compound Definition: The core independent claim defines the heterocyclic compound's structure, including variable groups and stereochemistry, ensuring coverage over different derivatives within the inventive genus.
-
Method of Use: Another independent claim describes the application of the compound for treating neurological conditions, including specific dosages and administration routes.
-
Pharmaceutical Composition: The patent claims formulations combining the compound with carriers or other therapeutics, emphasizing its use in specific dosage forms.
2. Dependent Claims
-
Structural Variations: Claims specify particular substituent groups, enhancing protection for various analogs.
-
Method of Synthesis: Claims detail synthetic pathways, including reagents and conditions, to prevent third-party manufacturing around the patent.
-
Therapeutic Methods: Claims specify treatment protocols, such as dosage schedules or combination therapies.
Claim Strengths and Limitations
The strength lies in the broad scope of the compound definition, potentially covering multiple analogs. However, the claims’ validity hinges on novelty and inventive step, especially against prior art in heterocyclic chemistry and neuroactive compounds. The detailed synthesis process and specific use claims bolster enforceability but may be circumvented via design-around strategies.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Prior Art and Patentability
The patent landscape includes prior art references relating to heterocyclic compounds for neurological indications. Notably:
- Precedent International Patents: Similar compounds patented elsewhere, e.g., US, EP, and JP families, covering heterocyclic structures acting on neurotransmitter pathways.
- Previous Korean Patents: Korean patents filed prior to 2015—such as KR10xxx—covering related compounds, requiring the current patent to demonstrate inventive step.
KR20150008929 differentiates itself by specific substitutions, stereochemistry, or application methods that were not disclosed previously, helping it overcome novelty rejections.
2. Competitive Patent Filings
Major pharmaceutical players have filed multiple patents around similar chemical classes, targeting CNS disorders, resulting in a crowded landscape. The patent’s scope—combining novel chemical structure and specific therapeutic uses—aims to carve out a unique protection zone amid this competition.
3. Geographic Patent Strategy
Beyond South Korea, assignees likely pursued patent protection in the US, Europe, China, and Japan, forming a strategic patent portfolio covering key markets.
4. Patent Validity and Challenges
The patent's validity may face challenges based on prior art examining prior disclosures of heterocyclic compounds and their uses. To withstand such challenges, the patent application likely emphasized the inventive step linked to structural novelty and unexpected therapeutic effects.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Innovators: The patent's broad compound claims establish a strong foundation for commercial development, licensing, or partnership opportunities within the neuropharmacology sector.
- Generic Manufacturers: They must carefully analyze the scope of claims and potential patent expiration or invalidation proceedings.
- Patent Offices & Legal Practitioners: KR20150008929 exemplifies diligent claim drafting to extend exclusivity in a competitive landscape.
Conclusion
KR20150008929 embodies a focused and strategic patent that delineates a novel heterocyclic compound, with claims extending into therapeutic use and manufacturing methods. Its broad compound definition and specific application claims bolster its enforceability, enabling the patent holder to secure significant market exclusivity within South Korea. However, the competitive landscape necessitates ongoing vigilance for potential challenges under prior art or design-around strategies.
Key Takeaways
- The patent's broad compound claims provide extensive protection over derivatives, but validity depends on the novelty over prior heterocyclic compounds.
- Its claims around therapeutic use and formulation are crucial for extending exclusivity into medical applications.
- The strategic landscape involves filing in multiple jurisdictions, considering the competitive patent environment surrounding CNS-active heterocyclic compounds.
- Ongoing patent challenges in prior art and inventive step remain a focus for patent enforcement.
- Stakeholders should monitor patent expiration timelines and potential infringement issues for strategic planning.
FAQs
1. What is the primary innovation claimed in KR20150008929?
The patent claims a novel heterocyclic compound with specific structural features designed for enhanced activity against neurological disorders, along with methods of manufacturing and use in treating such conditions.
2. How does this patent differentiate from prior art?
It differentiates through unique substitutions on the heterocyclic core, stereochemical configurations, and demonstrated therapeutic efficacy, which were not disclosed in prior patents.
3. What is the geographical scope of protection for this patent?
While granted in South Korea, the assignee likely filed corresponding applications in major markets such as the US, Europe, China, and Japan to maximize global exclusivity.
4. How secure is the patent against potential invalidation?
Its strength depends on the robustness of the novelty and inventive step over existing prior art. Challenges may focus on structural similarities and prior disclosures, but its broad claims and specific applications add to its resilience.
5. When might licensing opportunities or generic challenges arise?
Licensing can occur once the patent is granted and recognized as valid; patent expiration typically occurs 20 years from filing, around 2035—beyond which generic competition may emerge, subject to legal challenges.
Sources:
[1] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) patent database, KR20150008929.
[2] WIPO PATENTSCOPE database.
[3] Patent landscape reports on heterocyclic compounds for neurological indications.
