 |
| (Source: Kunhil Pharm) |
South Korea's patent tribunal has dismissed a non-infringement confirmation action brought by Kuhnil Pharm against a prostate cancer drug patent held by Medivation Prostate Therapeutics LLC and Astellas Pharma Inc., leaving the merits of infringement unresolved.
The Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board, or KIPTAB, on Jan. 7, 2026, issued a decision dismissing Kuhnil Pharm's petition concerning the patent titled "FORMULATIONS OF ENZALUTAMIDE" (KR2225416).
Enzalutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor used to treat prostate cancer. A non-infringement confirmation action in Korea is a procedural mechanism used by a party seeking a declaration that its product or technology does not fall within the scope of a patent holder's claims. A dismissal, however, reflects a failure to meet procedural or jurisdictional requirements, rather than a substantive determination on infringement.
In this case, the tribunal found grounds to dismiss the petition, such as an insufficiently specified subject invention or a lack of continuing legal interest in maintaining the action. As a result, the board did not rule on whether Kuhnil Pharm's formulation infringes the asserted patent.
Kuhnil Pharm had filed the petition in August 2025, arguing that a formulation described in its submission — a composition containing enzalutamide — did not fall within the scope of claims 1 through 5, 8 and 9 of the KR2225416 patent held by Medivation Prostate Therapeutics and Astellas.
The case is one of several challenges targeting the same patent. Other Korean pharmaceutical companies, including Alvogen Korea, GL Pharma, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, Chong Kun Dang Pharmaceutical Corp. and JW Pharmaceutical, filed similar non-infringement petitions against the enzalutamide patent in August 2025. Decisions in those proceedings have not yet been issued.
The dismissal leaves open the possibility of renewed challenges or infringement litigation, as the tribunal's ruling does not address the substantive scope or validity of the patent.
By PatenTrip
Comments
Post a Comment