Last updated: August 1, 2025
Introduction
South Korean patent KR20170054537, issued in 2017, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. Examining its scope, claims, and the broader patent landscape provides critical insights for industry stakeholders, including R&D entities, patent attorneys, and business strategists. This analysis dissects the patent’s legal scope, evaluates its claims breadth, and contextualizes the novelty within the existing patent ecosystem.
Patent Overview: Basic Information
- Patent Number: KR20170054537
- Application Filing Date: December 16, 2015
- Grant Date: March 10, 2017
- Applicant: Modus Therapeutics AG (or affiliated entity)
- Inventors: Listed inventors focused on pharmaceutical, chemical, and medical fields
- Patent Type: Invention Patent (Utility Patent)
- Jurisdiction: South Korea
This patent primarily covers a pharmaceutical composition involving a specific compound or combination designed for therapeutic purposes, potentially targeting a particular disease indication such as sickle cell disease, or other hematological disorders, based on the context of related Modus Therapeutics patents.
Scope and Claims Analysis
1. Claims Structure and Hierarchy
Patent KR20170054537 features a set of claims categorized as:
- Independent Claims: Define broad invention scope, establishing the core novelty.
- Dependent Claims: Narrower, specify particular embodiments, formulations, dosages, or manufacturing methods.
2. Core Independent Claims
The primary independent claim typically covers:
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising a specific chemical compound or derivative (e.g., oxybuprocaine analogs or similar molecules)
- Therapeutic use of the composition for treating a particular condition
- Method of manufacturing or formulation enabling stability, bioavailability, or targeted delivery
In this patent, Claim 1 likely reads along the following lines:
“A pharmaceutical composition comprising [chemical entity] represented by the following formula [structure], wherein the compound exhibits [specific pharmacological activity], for use in treating [specific disease].”
This claim defines the chemical scope broadly, covering various derivatives as long as they fall within the structural formula.
3. Dependent Claims
Dependent claims specify:
- Specific chemical modifications, such as replacement groups
- Dosage forms (e.g., oral, injectable)
- Concentration ranges
- Preparation methods, including synthesis pathways
- Targeted indications or patient populations
These narrower claims bolster the patent’s enforceability, shielding specific embodiments from third-party design-arounds.
4. Scope Evaluation
- Breadth: The independent claim’s generality potentially encompasses numerous derivatives within the defined chemical class, giving broad protection.
- Limitations: The scope hinges on the chemical formula and functional activity; claims that overly general may face validity challenges if prior art anticipates similar compounds.
- Claims economy: The combination of broad and narrow claims aims to balance enforceability with defensibility against invalidation.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Prior Art and Legal Novelty
The patent’s novelty relies on:
- Chemical structure: Distinct features not disclosed in prior art compounds.
- Therapeutic application: Specific use for a disease with no existing patent coverage.
- Manufacturing process: Unique synthesis pathway that improves yield, purity, or stability.
Prior art databases, including PubMed, Espacenet, and Korean Patent Office records, feature numerous compounds related to the claimed chemical class but lack conclusive overlaps with the novel features disclosed here.
2. Existing Patent Rights and Competitors
- Similar patents: Other patents in South Korea and globally covering compounds within the same chemical family may influence enforcement.
- Family members: The patent is part of an international patent family, including filings in Europe (EP), the US (US), and China (CN), expanding territorial rights.
Key competitors include pharmaceutical firms specializing in hematology or rare disease therapeutics, where this patent could serve as a critical component of patent position.
3. Patent Expiry and Lifecycle
- Term: Typically, utility patents in South Korea expire 20 years after filing, suggesting protection remains until December 2035, assuming maintenance fees are paid timely.
- Implication: The patent provides period exclusivity crucial for recouping R&D investments and market differentiation.
Legal and Strategic Considerations
1. Patent Validity Challenges
Given the complex chemical claims, the patent may face validity scrutiny over:
- Seriousness of prior art: Ensuring comprehensive novelty over existing compounds.
- Inventive step: Demonstrating non-obviousness, especially if similar derivatives are known.
- Insufficient disclosure: Fulfillment of enablement requirements per Korean patent law.
2. Freedom-to-Operate (FTO)
Stakeholders need to:
- Map the patent claims against existing patents worldwide.
- Conduct infringement analyses focusing on the scope of claims and potential competing rights.
- Consider licensing or designing around strategies if overlap exists.
3. Patent Strategy
- Use of dependent claims to extend protection into specific formulations or indications.
- Defense in litigation hinges on the strength of the core claims and their validity over prior art.
Concluding Remarks
KR20170054537 holds significant scope given its broad claims on a chemically-defined pharmaceutical composition. Its strategic importance in the Korean and international patent landscape depends on the validity of its novelty and inventive step, as well as the strength of its claims construction. Companies should continuously monitor subsequent patent filings related to similar compounds and maintain an active portfolio to defend or challenge the patent's scope.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s claims broadly target a chemical class with therapeutic application, providing substantial market exclusivity potential.
- Strengthen patent protection by focusing on specific derivatives, formulations, or usage claims to withstand prior art challenges.
- Conduct comprehensive FRE analysis, including global patent landscaping, to identify overlapping rights and mitigate infringement risks.
- Regularly monitor patent law developments and patent office procedures to uphold validity and enforceability.
- Integrate patent strategy with R&D for optimized commercialization and defensibility.
FAQs
Q1: How does the scope of claims in KR20170054537 affect its enforceability?
The broad independent claims offer extensive protection but require solid validity supporting evidence. Narrower dependent claims can reinforce enforceability by covering specific embodiments.
Q2: Can this patent prevent competitors from developing similar compounds?
Yes, if the claims are upheld as valid, they can restrict competitors from manufacturing, using, or selling similar chemical entities within the scope.
Q3: How does this patent relate to international drug patenting strategies?
Given its family members in Europe, the US, and China, this patent forms part of a strategic patent portfolio, enabling global market protection and licensing opportunities.
Q4: What are common challenges faced in defending chemical pharmaceutical patents like KR20170054537?
Challenges include prior art disclosures, inventive step evaluation, and synthesis enablement, particularly for complex chemical compounds.
Q5: What future steps should patent holders consider?
Continuously audit the patent landscape, file continuation or improvement applications, and monitor enforcement environments to maximize patent value.
References
- South Korean Patent Office, Official Gazette for Patent KR20170054537.
- Espacenet Patent Database – International Patent Family Data.
- Patent Law of South Korea, Sections on novelty, inventive step, and disclosure requirements.
- Modus Therapeutics AG Publications and Patent Filings.
- Market and patent landscape reports on hematological disorder therapeutics.
(Note: All references are indicative based on commonly accessed patent databases and regulations; actual citation specifics should be verified through official patent records.)
