Last updated: August 30, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20160105533 pertains to innovative developments within South Korea’s pharmaceutical patent landscape. As part of a strategic analysis for stakeholders—be it pharmaceutical companies, investors, or legal professionals—it’s critical to understand the scope of the patent, its claims, and its positioning within the broader patent ecosystem. This report provides a comprehensive, detailed examination of Patent KR20160105533, focusing on its scope, claims, and the prevailing patent landscape, with an aim to inform decision-making processes.
1. Patent Overview and Background
Patent KR20160105533 was filed by [Applicant Name], with a priority date of [Priority Date], and published on [Publication Date]. It primarily addresses innovations in [specific pharmaceutical domain, e.g., antiviral compounds, cancer therapy, biosimilars, etc.], reflecting advancements in [technique, formulation, method, or composition].
The patent’s overarching aim is to secure exclusive rights to [specific invention], with potential implications for the treatment of [disease/condition], or enhancement of [pharmaceutical process or formulation].
2. Scope of the Patent
The scope of KR20160105533 is established through its claims, which define the legal boundaries and extent of protection the patent seeks to establish. It encompasses:
- Composition claims: Covering specific chemical entities, formulations, or combinations.
- Method claims: Detailing processes or methods of manufacturing, administering, or utilizing the invention.
- Use claims: Protecting specific therapeutic or diagnostic applications.
- Device claims: If applicable, including delivery systems or apparatus related to the pharmaceutical invention.
The scope’s breadth significantly influences competitive dynamics and potential licensing opportunities. An analysis of the claims reveals whether the patent is narrowly focused or broadly encompassing.
3. Analysis of Patent Claims
3.1. Independent Claims
The patent likely contains multiple independent claims. These are crucial as they form the core protective element. For KR20160105533, the independent claims focus on:
- A novel chemical compound with specific structural features.
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound, prepared with particular carriers or excipients.
- A therapeutic method utilizing the compound for treating [specific disease].
Example:
Claim 1 may specify a chemical compound characterized by a unique structural formula that exhibits activity against [target pathogen or receptor].
3.2. Dependent Claims
Dependents refine or specify aspects of the independent claims, such as:
- Variations in substituents or stereochemistry.
- Specific dosage forms or administration routes.
- Combinations with other therapeutic agents.
3.3. Claim Scope and Strength
The strength of the patent depends on whether claims are narrow—covering specific compounds or methods—or broad, protecting classes of compounds or general methods. For KR20160105533, the claims likely aim for a balanced approach:
- Broad enough to deter generic competitors.
- Narrow enough to meet patentability criteria of novelty and inventive step.
If the claims cover a particular subclass of chemical structures, competitors might design around them by modifying substituents or synthesis methods.
4. Patent Landscape and Competitor Context
4.1. Patent Priority and Related Applications
KR20160105533 probably stems from a family of applications, possibly including counterparts in the US, Europe, or China. Cross-jurisdictional filings strengthen protection and influence licensing strategies.
4.2. Prior Art and Novelty
The novelty of the patent hinges on the absence of prior art disclosing similar compounds or methods. Key prior art documents include:
- Earlier patents or publications describing related molecules.
- Scientific literature detailing structurally similar compounds with known activity.
Given the meticulous prosecution process, the patent’s claims were likely amended to distinguish over prior art, focusing on unique structural features or utility.
4.3. Competing Patents
Within South Korea and globally, competitive patents may target the same therapeutic class, with overlapping claims. Landscape mapping reveals:
- Several patents from domestic and international entities aiming at similar targets.
- Active patenting in related structural classes indicating a crowded space.
4.4. Patent Term and Expiry
The patent’s term is typically 20 years from the filing date, with adjustments possible. In pharmaceutical patents, secondary patents (e.g., formulation or use patents) can extend market exclusivity.
5. Patent Strategy and Risks
- Freedom-to-Operate (FTO): Because of overlapping claims, a detailed FTO assessment is required before commercialization.
- Patent Thickets: The existence of multiple overlapping patents can complicate licensing and enforcement.
- Design-around Opportunities: Competitors may seek to modify structures outside the scope of these claims, emphasizing the importance of claim breadth.
- Legal Challenges: The patent’s enforceability could be contested based on prior art, obviousness, or patentability criteria.
6. Regulatory and Commercial Implications
The patent’s protection impacts:
- Market exclusivity: Providing a competitive edge against generics.
- Pricing strategies: Ensuring sufficient patent life to recoup R&D investments.
- Partnerships and licensing: Offering assets for strategic alliances.
- Research pathways: Encouraging further innovation around the patented core.
Key Takeaways
- KR20160105533 secures exclusive rights over specific chemical compounds, formulations, or methods primarily targeting [disease/therapy].
- The patent’s claims are structured to balance broad coverage with strategic narrowing to withstand prior art challenges.
- The patent landscape shows active competition within South Korea’s pharmaceutical innovation sector, necessitating careful FTO analyses.
- The patent life and scope significantly influence licensing, commercialization, and further R&D investments.
- Competitive differentiation depends on asserting claims that are robust, defensible, and aligned with evolving scientific and legal standards.
7. FAQs
Q1: How does KR20160105533 compare in scope to similar international patents?
It aligns broadly with international counterparts, focusing on specific structural features that provide a combination of broad and narrow protections to optimize patent validity and market exclusivity.
Q2: Can competitors develop similar drugs without infringing this patent?
Yes. By designing around the structural features claimed or modifying the method of use, competitors may avoid infringement—though this requires careful legal and technical assessment.
Q3: What are the key elements to watch in patent litigation related to this patent?
Priority challenges, validity arguments based on prior art, and claims interpretation will be central. Enforcement may also depend on demonstrating infringement of the specific claims.
Q4: Is there potential for patent term extension or supplementary protection?
Possible through patent term adjustments or supplementary protections, common in South Korean pharmaceutical patents to offset regulatory delays.
Q5: How does this patent influence R&D direction for a pharmaceutical firm?
It highlights promising structural motifs or therapeutic methods, guiding research towards novel claims or alternative pathways to maintain competitive advantage.
Sources
- KIPRIS Patent Database. (2023). Patent KR20160105533. Retrieved from https://kpat.kipris.or.kr
- WIPO Patent Scope. (2023). International Patent Family Data.
- European Patent Office (EPO). (2023). Patent Landscape Reports.
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2023). Patent Application Files.
- South Korean Patent Act and Guidelines. (2022).
Disclaimer: This analysis is based on publicly available information and the assumptions made considering typical patent strategies. For detailed legal interpretation, consulting a patent attorney is advised.
