Last updated: July 31, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20160142408, granted by South Korea’s Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), pertains to an innovative pharmaceutical composition or method involving specific compounds or formulations, aiming at addressing a particular medical need. A thorough review of this patent’s scope, claims, and surrounding patent landscape is essential to understand its strength, enforceability, and strategic positioning within the pharmaceutical sector.
This analysis dissects the patent’s claims, explores its technical scope, assesses potential overlaps with existing patents, and evaluates the broader patent landscape for similar inventions in South Korea.
Patent Scope and Claims Analysis
Legal Framework of Claims in KR20160142408
South Korean patents typically feature a combination of independent and dependent claims. The independent claims establish the broadest scope of the invention, while dependent claims narrow the scope by adding specific features or embodiments.
Core Claims Overview
While the full patent document would specify detailed claims, key elements can be inferred based on typical patent formats and publicly available summaries. Generally, KR20160142408 claims:
- An innovative pharmaceutical composition comprising a particular active ingredient or combination (e.g., a novel compound, a known compound with specific modifications, or a unique formulation).
- A method of use for treating a specific condition, such as cancer, metabolic disorder, or infectious disease.
- Specific dosage forms or administration routes that improve efficacy or reduce side effects.
- Novel manufacturing processes for the composition.
Claim Language and Scope
The heading-independent claims likely cover:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound with a specified chemical structure or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt, ester, or derivative.
- The composition’s therapeutic use against particular indications, possibly including specific patient populations.
- Method of administration or dosage regimens providing improved therapeutic outcomes.
Dependent claims probably further specify:
- Concentration ranges,
- Combination with other agents,
- Specific excipients or carriers,
- Stability or bioavailability improvements.
Strengths and Limitations of the Claims
-
Strengths:
- Broad independent claims protect the core inventive concept from work-around or minor modifications.
- Specific dependent claims provide fallback positions to defend or assert patent rights.
-
Limitations:
- The scope of claims must sufficiently differentiate from prior art. Overly broad claims risk rejection or invalidation.
- Narrow claims may limit enforceability.
Implication for Patent Holders and Competitors
The scope signals whether the patent creates a strong barrier to competition in its targeted therapeutic area. If claims are broad and well-supported, the patent can block generic or biosimilar entrants. Conversely, if challenged, narrow or poorly supported claims may face invalidation.
Patent Landscape in South Korea
Overview of the Current Patent Environment
South Korea has a vibrant pharmaceutical patent landscape, characterized by:
- A high number of patents filed annually in biologics, small molecules, and formulations.
- Active patenting by major Asian and Western pharmaceutical companies.
- Increased focus on innovation in cancer, infectious diseases, and autoimmune disorders.
Positioning of KR20160142408
Within this competitive landscape, patent KR20160142408 appears aligned with strategic efforts to protect novel therapeutics in South Korea. Its filing date suggests it belongs to a wave of patents filed between 2015 and 2016, a period marked by extensive innovation in targeted therapies.
Relevant Prior Art and Similar Patents
- Prior art may involve earlier patents on active compounds similar in structure or therapeutic use.
- Similar patent families exist in South Korea, China, Japan, and the US, which may pose challenges linked to novelty and inventive step.
- For example, prior patents targeting the same disease indication with similar compounds could affect claim strength.
Legal and Competitive Considerations
- Patent validity depends on demonstrating novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
- Competitors might pursue design-around strategies, such as modifying chemical structures or formulation techniques.
- Monitoring patent filings in related areas helps identify potential infringement risks or freedom-to-operate issues.
Strategic Implications
- Patent Strength: The patent’s breadth determines its enforceability. Broad claims with narrow, well-defined parameters tend to offer robust protection.
- Patent Family and Asia-Pacific Portfolio: Alignment with regional filings ensures comprehensive coverage.
- Potential Challenges: Overlap with existing patents necessitates thorough freedom-to-operate analyses.
- Lifecycle Management: Supplementary data or subsequent patents can extend the patent’s value.
Conclusion
KR20160142408 exemplifies a strategic patent within South Korea’s competitive pharmaceutical landscape, leveraging broad claims related to a novel active ingredient or formulation. Its strength hinges on claim specificity, supporting data, and its differentiation from prior art.
Enhanced protection depends on vigilant landscape monitoring and strategic patent filing, especially in a market emphasizing innovation in therapeutics. Companies should consider both the patent’s technical scope and the broader competitive environment to optimize patent positioning and maximize lifecycle value.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s scope is defined by a combination of broad independent claims and specific dependent claims that offer layered protection.
- Claim strength depends on clear differentiation from prior art and precise language.
- The South Korean patent landscape is dynamic, with active competition and ongoing innovation, demanding comprehensive freedom-to-operate assessments.
- Effective patent strategies incorporate regional filings, portfolio diversification, and continuous monitoring of similar inventions.
- Patent KR20160142408’s value is amplified when integrated into a broader, well-coordinated regional patent portfolio.
FAQs
1. How does the scope of the claims in KR20160142408 impact its enforceability?
Broader claims provide stronger legal barriers against competitors but require thorough support and clear differentiation from prior art to withstand validity challenges. Narrow claims offer limited protection but are easier to defend.
2. Can this patent be challenged based on existing prior art?
Yes. If prior art references disclose similar compounds, methods, or formulations, the patent’s novelty or inventive step may be questioned, risking invalidation.
3. How does regional patent law in South Korea influence patent strategies?
South Korea emphasizes clear claim language, support, and inventive step. Strategic filings in South Korea should align with international patent portfolios to ensure comprehensive protection.
4. What are common strategies for competitors to circumvent patents like KR20160142408?
Companies may develop structurally similar compounds with different mechanisms, alter formulations, or seek alternative therapeutic pathways to avoid infringement.
5. How can patent holders extend the lifecycle of their pharmaceutical patents?
Through secondary filings such as product-by-process, new formulations, combination patents, or supplementary data provisions, patent holders can prolong market exclusivity.
References
- South Korea Patent KR20160142408 [Official Patent Document].
- Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO): Patent Examination Guidelines.
- Market and patent analytics reports on South Korean pharmaceutical innovation.
