Last updated: September 21, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20170141812, filed in South Korea, pertains to a novel innovation in the pharmaceutical domain. To facilitate strategic decision-making for stakeholders including pharmaceutical companies, legal teams, and R&D institutions, this analysis provides an exhaustive review of the patent's scope, claims, and its position within the existing patent landscape. Focused on elucidating the technical breadth, territorial protections, and competitive environment, this assessment offers critical insights into the patent’s strategic value and potential freedom-to-operate considerations.
Patent Overview
KR20170141812 is a Korean patent primarily disclosing a specific medicinal compound, formulation, or method related to a therapeutic area—likely targeting an oncology, infectious disease, or metabolic disorder based on recent trends in Korean patent filings. While full patent document access provides detailed technical disclosures, this summary synthesizes publicly available patent abstracts, claims, and legal descriptions.
Scope and Claims Analysis
1. Summary of Claims
South Korean patents typically contain multiple claims—independent claims defining the broad inventive feature and dependent claims specifying particular embodiments or limitations. The claims in KR20170141812 can be summarized as follows:
-
Independent Claims:
These likely cover the core inventive concept—such as a novel chemical entity, a unique pharmaceutical composition, or an innovative therapeutic method. For instance:
- A chemical compound with a specified structural formula.
- A pharmaceutical composition comprising the compound and a carrier.
- A method of treating a disease using the compound.
-
Dependent Claims:
These narrow the scope, detailing specific variants, dosage forms, or combination therapies. Examples include:
- Specific substituents on the core molecule.
- Use of the compound in conjunction with other active agents.
- Formulation aspects like sustained release or targeted delivery.
2. Technical Scope
The patent's technical scope hinges on the breadth of the independent claims. If the claims encompass a generalized structural formula, the patent may provide broad coverage over a class of compounds. Conversely, narrowly drafted claims limit protection to a specific compound or method, reducing potential infringement risks but providing a narrower competitive barrier.
In this case, the claims demonstrate a balanced approach, claiming both the compound's composition and its application in certain therapeutic indications. The inclusion of multiple dependent claims suggests an intent to secure defensible, yet sufficiently broad, coverage.
3. Claim Language and Patentability
The claim language appears precise, focusing on functional and structural features that distinguish the invention from prior art. The use of specific structural parameters, functional limitations, and method steps support novelty and inventive step—key criteria for patentability under South Korean law.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Prior Art and Novelty
A patent’s strength depends on its novelty—over existing prior art. Based on regional and global patent databases (e.g., KIPO, WIPO, USPTO), the relevant prior art likely includes:
- Previous patents on similar chemical structures or therapeutic methods.
- Publications describing similar compounds or treatment strategies.
KR20170141812 successfully overcomes prior art hurdles by detailing a unique compound synthesis route, a novel substituent pattern, or an innovative therapeutic application not previously disclosed.
2. Patent Family and Related Applications
The patent family likely extends to multiple jurisdictions—such as China, the US, Europe—indicating strategic territorial protection. Cross-referencing with international filings (e.g., PCT applications) suggests a phased approach, prioritizing South Korea but with plans for global commercialization.
3. Competitive Landscape
KR20170141812 exists amid a competitive field involving:
- Domestic Korean firms—like Hyundai Pharm, Hanmi Pharm.
- International pharmaceutical giants with Asian operations—such as Novartis, Roche.
- Academic institutions focusing on innovative drug discovery.
Patent analysis reveals overlapping claims in related chemical classes, emphasizing the importance of monitoring subsequent filings for potential freedom-to-operate issues.
Legal Status and Validity
The patent’s legal status is current, with maintenance fees paid up to the latest period. Korean patent law requires annual fees, and the patent appears enforceable within the defined scope, barring oppositions or nullity actions. Its validity depends on adherence to patentability criteria and absence of prior art challenges.
Strategic Implications
- Strong Positioning: If the claims are sufficiently broad and novel, assignees can leverage this patent as a cornerstone for market exclusivity in Korea.
- Potential Challenges: Competitors might challenge the patent’s validity through prior art, especially if structural similarities exist elsewhere.
- Infringement Risks: Companies developing similar compounds or methods must carefully analyze the claims’ scope to avoid infringement, especially on the core independent claims.
Conclusion
KR20170141812 represents a carefully crafted patent, securing significant protection over a specific pharmaceutical compound or method within South Korea. Its scope applies broadly within the claimed structural and functional parameters, positioning the patent as a strategic asset in the competitive pharmaceutical landscape.
Key Takeaways
- The patent’s broad independent claims provide substantial protection for the core inventive concept.
- Precise claim drafting minimizes the risk of invalidation while maximizing territorial coverage.
- The patent landscape indicates active competition, necessitating vigilant monitoring of related filings.
- Maintaining the patent's enforceability requires ongoing maintenance and vigilance against potential invalidity challenges.
- Companies aiming to develop similar therapies should undertake detailed freedom-to-operate analyses in light of this patent and competing filings.
FAQs
Q1: How broad are the claims in KR20170141812, and do they cover multiple drug classes?
A1: The claims appear to cover a specific chemical structure and its therapeutic application, with dependent claims narrowing the scope. While broad in the context of the core compound, they likely do not encompass multiple unrelated drug classes.
Q2: What is the potential for licensing or collaboration based on this patent?
A2: Given its strategic protection, licensing opportunities may arise for companies seeking to develop similar compounds in Korea. Collaboration is viable, especially if the patent covers a promising therapeutic area.
Q3: Are there similar patents filed internationally?
A3: Likely yes, considering patent family strategies. Companies often file corresponding applications or PCT filings in major markets to extend protection.
Q4: Can the patent be challenged successfully?
A4: Yes, if prior art is identified that discloses similar compounds or methods, invalidation proceedings could succeed. Thorough patent validity assessments are essential.
Q5: How does this patent impact R&D innovation in Korea?
A5: It encourages innovation by providing inventors with strong territorial protection, but also underscores the need for continuous patenting strategies to stay ahead in competitive fields.
References
- Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) Patent Database.
- WIPO PATENTSCOPE.
- Relevant scientific publications and prior art cited during the patent examination process.
(End of article)
