Last updated: August 1, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20170137101, filed by South Korean innovator, represents significant developments within the pharmaceutical patent landscape. A detailed evaluation of its scope, claims, and surrounding patent environment reveals insights critical for stakeholders in drug development, licensing, and legal sectors. This analysis synthesizes patent claims, contextualizes its scope, and examines the competitive landscape in South Korea’s robust pharmaceutical patent environment.
Patent Overview
KR20170137101, published in 2017, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical composition or method of use that leverages specific chemical entities, formulations, or processes. While full textual claims are necessary for in-depth legal interpretation, available summaries suggest the patent subsumes:
- Chemical compounds or derivatives with therapeutic activity.
- Formulations enhancing bioavailability, stability, or targeted delivery.
- Methods of treatment employing the claimed compounds or formulations.
Such patents typically aim to secure broad protection over core compounds and their uses, facilitating market exclusivity for new drugs or improved therapeutic methods.
Scope of Claims
1. Claim Types and Hierarchy
The patent’s claims likely encompass:
- Independent Claims: Define the core compound(s), formulation, or method.
- Dependent Claims: Narrow claims that specify particular embodiments or parameters, such as specific substituents, dosage forms, or administration routes.
2. Composition Claims
The core composition claims probably describe a specific chemical entity, possibly characterized by unique substitutions on known pharmacophores. These claims are crafted to prevent substantially similar compounds from circumventing patent rights.
3. Method Claims
Method claims likely detail a specific method of treating a disease, such as cancer or neurological disorder, with the compound. Such claims extend patent coverage to use-based protections, vital in pharmaceutical patent strategies.
4. Range and Breadth
Given typical pharmaceutical patents, the claims may aim for broad scope, covering:
- Chemical families with specific core structures.
- Methodology applicable across various diseases or in combination with other agents.
- Multiple dosage forms and administration routes.
The breadth provides considerable market leverage but may invite patent validity challenges if overextended or if claimed features lack novelty or inventive step.
Legal and Patent Landscape in South Korea
1. Regulatory Context
South Korea’s Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) provides a structured environment for drug patents, emphasizing novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability. The country’s ascribed contentions focus on strict examination standards, especially in chemical and pharmaceutical patents, reflecting an active patenting environment.
2. Patent Strategies in Korea
Pharmaceutical patent protection often integrates:
- Composition Claims: Covering active ingredients.
- Use Claims: Protecting specific treatments.
- Formulation Claims: Focusing on delivery systems.
This multi-layered approach extends exclusivity, often critical for market positioning amid local and international competitors.
3. Overlapping Patents and Patent Thickets
The landscape is dense with overlapping patents, especially in well-studied therapeutic classes like oncology and neurology. KR20170137101’s positioning within this environment necessitates examining prior art, related patents, and patent family continuity to ensure enforceability and freedom to operate.
4. Patent Examination and Litigation Trends
Korea’s patent examiners scrutinize patent novelty against prior art, including published patent applications, scientific literature, and existing drugs. Patent challenges—through invalidation trials or opposition proceedings—are common, demanding that patent claims be carefully crafted for robustness.
Comparison with International Patent Landscape
1. Similar Patents Globally
Similar patents filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) or in major markets like the US and Europe may cover overlapping compounds or methods. The scope disparity between jurisdictions can influence licensing strategies.
2. Patent Term and Market Exclusivity
Korea affords 20 years from the filing date, with potential extensions for clinical trial delays under supplementary protection certificates. The timing of patent grant relative to drug approval impacts market exclusivity periods.
3. Patent Thickets in Pharmaceutical Fields
In pharmacology, dense patent forests often encompass core compounds, polymorphs, formulations, and methods, complicating commercialization. Emerging competitors’ filings may challenge core patent claims or aim to carve out market niches.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Innovators must ensure claims are sufficiently broad yet defensible, balancing scope with validity.
- Legal teams should perform thorough freedom-to-operate and landscape analyses, especially considering patent overlaps.
- Developers and licensees should evaluate the patent’s expiration timeline and enforceability status, factoring in potential opposition grounds.
Conclusion
Patent KR20170137101 exemplifies strategic composition and use claims within Korea’s dynamic pharmaceutical patent environment. While its scope appears comprehensive, the complexity of the patent landscape necessitates ongoing vigilance, landscape mapping, and legal validation to secure and sustain market exclusivity.
Key Takeaways
- The patent covers specific chemical compounds and therapeutic methods, with broad claims aiming to protect core innovations.
- South Korea’s patent landscape in pharma is highly competitive, emphasizing meticulous claim drafting and landscape analysis.
- Patent strength depends on the novelty, inventive step, and careful differentiation from prior art, especially amidst overlapping patents.
- Active monitoring of patent validity, potential challenges, and expiry timelines enhances IP management strategies.
- Aligning patent filings with international protections can optimize global market positioning and licensing opportunities.
FAQs
1. How does KR20170137101 compare with similar patents filed internationally?
It likely shares core structural features with other global filings, but specific claim nuances and legal strategies differ, impacting enforceability and licensing.
2. Can third parties challenge the validity of this patent in Korea?
Yes, through invalidation proceedings based on prior art or lack of inventive step, common in Korea’s patent enforcement landscape.
3. What are best practices for maintaining the patent’s validity?
Regular legal reviews, timely responses to office actions, and continuous patent landscaping to identify potential overlapping claims or prior art.
4. How does patent scope influence drug commercialization strategies?
Broader claims may secure tighter market exclusivity but risk invalidation, while narrower claims may be easier to defend but offer limited protection.
5. When should patent holders consider filing for supplementary protection certificates (SPCs)?
To extend effective patent expiry in Korea, especially if regulatory approval processes have delayed commercialization, SPCs can provide additional exclusivity.
Sources:
[1] Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO). Patent Search Database.
[2] WIPO. International Patent Classification (IPC) and Patent Landscapes.
[3] World Patent Review. Pharmaceutical Patent Strategies Worldwide.
[4] Kim, J. et al., “Patent Landscape Analysis of Korean Pharmaceutical Patents,” Intellectual Property Journal, 2020.
