2011年4月30日 星期六

In re Tanaka, Appeal No. 2010-1262 判決

CAFC在4.15.2011撤銷一件USPTO訴願委員會做出不符再領證(reissue)要件的申請案決議
(In re Tanaka, Appeal No. 2010-1262)

美國專利法第251條規範了Reissue的程序,可參考:http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/12/251-reissue.html

此案中,申請人Tanaka提出專利案的再領證案,加入一個“附屬項“,但並未改變其他說明書、圖示與權利範圍的內容,此申請被USPTO否決,原因是並未造成原專利案內容全部或部份“失效"(...deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing,...),不符美國專利法第251條提供申請人改寫範圍與內容機會的再領證的動機。此案中,USPTO訴願委員會認為申請人僅加入一個範圍較窄的附屬項並不能在再領證程序中執行,因此駁回請求

事實上,上述對已核准專利提出reissue而僅加入一些附屬範圍的事情是經常發生,專利權人常常會將一些可能產生對競爭對手威脅的專利範圍加入已經核准的專利上,使得專利看起來更為powerful。

因此,參考以前的案例,CAFC否決USPTO對專利法第251條的解釋,同意類似此案的再領證案可以在已經核准的專利權範圍內加入更確認其專利界限的附屬項(更窄的範圍)。申請人在此次決定後確認可以在已核准範圍加入更多附屬又較窄的範圍,以有效保護其發明

Ron
資料來源:BSKB.com

2011年4月29日 星期五

世界專利局網站Google翻譯

WIPO的檢索頁提供全文Google翻譯,這對需要瞭解該技術的人來說實在是好用
進入全文後,此例為德文,可以改為英文,甚至是中文,初步來看,理解上是十分OK的

原本的頁面,右方有個Google翻譯的下拉選單:


選擇英文後:


選擇中文後:


滑鼠指到某段,還會同時顯示原文對應:


Ron

2011年4月20日 星期三

Unclaimed Essential Matter(About Claims XXXVIII)

筆記:Unclaimed Essential Matter

如果權利範圍遺漏或省略了實施該發明的必要特徵,或是揭露於說明書或其他文件中相關技術的必要特徵,則可以違反美國專利法第112條第1段(http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/09/112.html)核駁,理由是該權利範圍無法實施

這類必要特徵如:遺漏的元件、方法或結構中元件間的連接關係,通常是根據說明書內容而判斷,根據MPEP 2164.08(c),要從整個揭露書來判斷該權利範圍是否遺漏了必要特徵、必要限制條件(made only when the language of the specification makes it clear that the limitation is critical for the invention to function as intended)

若權利範圍必要元件間缺乏申請人於說明書中描述的關聯性,則可以違法美國專利法第112條第2段核駁,原因是該權利範圍並未揭示出該發明實施之必要內容。這些元件關聯往往與專利性無關。
根據In re Venezia, 530 F.2d 956, 189 USPQ 149判決,權利範圍中元件應以合理的準確度與細節定義其界限,以符合美國專利法第112條第2項之規定

Ron

2011年4月17日 星期日

Linux Magazine Youtube channel

http://www.youtube.com/user/LinuxMagazine

Cool, 英國一本Linux雜誌就叫"Linux Magazine",算是我最常看的網站,以前也訂過好幾年的實體書,他們的Youtube頻道也挺精彩,介紹給各位,可以看到學術的、實用的內容,這就是一些外國人在這些專業技術上又顯得【學術】的厲害之處(專利也是)


Ron

2011年4月16日 星期六

歐洲專利說明書修正

在歐洲專利法或是多數EP會員國的專利法規定修正的限制感覺上也是如同其他各國的限制,對核准前的修正算是寬容,對核准後因權利已經確認而限制頗多

修正時,原則規範於歐洲專利法第123條,細節則規範於施行細則Rule 137,其中特別的是在收到歐洲專利局檢索報告前不得提出修正,在另一情況是,若專利核准後,發現權利範圍中有特徵是在原揭露內容所沒有揭露的,因為刪除會造成權利範圍擴大,雖然此修正可能是在審查答辯過程被審查委員認同的,但因為修正仍根據申請人意見,EPO會撤回此專利

Rule 137
(1) 在收到EPO檢索報告前,不得修正說明書、權利範圍與圖式
(2) 申請人對應EPO意見回應時,可伴隨說明書、權利範圍與圖式
(3) 若沒有EPO(審查委員)的同意,不能修正
(4) 申請修正時,申請人應表示修訂的部份是依據原申請內容,若審查委員認為修正不合規定,應提出校正要求,並要求一個月內提出
(5) 修改的權利範圍應不能非關經檢索範圍下的發明概念之外的內容,特別是不能關於"尚未檢索“的特徵,也不能包含因為單一性而未審查的其他獨立範圍(申請範圍在16項(含)以上有超項費用)

EPC Art. 123(1) 提供申請人至少一次對申請案或核准專利的修正機會
EPC Art. 123(2) 規範申請人於修正時不得超出原申請時揭露內容
EPC Art. 123(3) 規範已核准授權專利之修正不得超出已授與之專利範圍

[原文]
EPC Art.123 AMENDMENTS
(1) The European patent application or European patent may be amended in proceedings before the European Patent Office, in accordance with the Implementing Regulations. In any event, the applicant shall be given at least one opportunity to amend the application of his own volition.
(2) The European patent application or European patent may not be amended in such a way that it contains subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed.
(3) The European patent may not be amended in such a way as to extend the protection it confers.

Ron

2011年4月12日 星期二

瀏覽器可執行碼的記載(About Claims XXXVII)

MPEP 608.01中VII段落提到「瀏覽器可執行碼(browser-executable code)」在說明書中的記載規定,其中規定審查委員應檢查專利申請說明書內容是否包括超連結(hyperlink)、瀏覽器可執行碼的形式的記載,特別是針對一些商業網站URL,這些都不能涵蓋在說明書中

主要原因是因為專利說明書日後存檔,被使用者瀏覽文件時,會自動對特定網址或是程式產生超連結,使用者可能會點入並連結到特定網頁,此點,USPTO的文件不能被允許連結到特定與官方無關的網址!

如果專利說明書出現上述超連結或是特定程式,審查委員將會提出Objections,並要求刪除!

[本段原文]
Examiners must review patent applications to make certain that hyperlinks and other forms of browser-executable code, especially commercial site URLs, are not included in a patent application.

再根據37 CFR 1.57(d)的規定,說明書中的超連結或是其他形式的瀏覽器可執行碼都不被允許

[原文]
Other material ("Nonessential material") may be incorporated by reference to U.S. patents, U.S. patent application publications, foreign patents, foreign published applications, prior and concurrently filed commonly owned U.S. applications, or non-patent publications. An incorporation by reference by hyperlink or other form of browser executable code is not permitted.

列舉一例:


申請專利範圍的撰寫也是要避免相關記載!
Ron
其他MPEP 608.01的撰寫規定
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/12/mpep-60801b.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/10/about-claims-xi-mpep-section-60801n.html

2011年4月8日 星期五

韓國專利說明書應補入完整背景技術

日前韓國修法通過:

發明專利說明書與新型專利說明書都應該描述該發明的完整的背景技術
否則將會被核駁,若已經核准的案子這個規定不能成為舉發理由

將於7.1.2011實施,之後的申請案若無描述,即發出核駁通知,但已申請案則可以修正補寫

Ron

2011年4月7日 星期四

多付4000美金加速US審查

日前美國專利局提出Track-One審查計畫費用!
track-one計畫是"three-track"內的方案
Track I: prioritized examination (優先審查,約12個月內獲得最終結果)

Track II: traditional examination under the current procedures (傳統審查,近3年)

Track III: for non-continuing applications first filed in the USPTO, an applicant-controlled delay for up to 30 months prior to docketing for examination. (申請人延遲,最多至進審前30個月)

除了一般申請費以外,再多付4000美金(小實體可有50%折扣),可以在4個月獲得第一次審查意見,12個月內獲得最終審查結果,不過限制案件數量在9.30.2011前10000件(數量會評估)
updated on Aug. 7, 2012 目前費用:發明案加速4800(大實體)、2400(小實體);設計專利加速900






欲申請track-one程序的申請案應符合:

(1) 為3.4.2011當天或之後的申請案(第一次新案申請,非延續案)
(2) 應符合美國專利第111條(說明書寫作規定)、37 CFR 1.51(b)說明書的格式、費用規定
(3) 應以電子送件,且包括必要的宣誓書、費用
(4) 申請案不得超過4的獨立範圍,與整體30項權利範圍(超項費是超過3個獨立項與整體20項)
(5) 不受理延期
(6) 不得修正造成權利範圍項數超過上述限制
(7) 不得有多重附屬項

USPTO to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications on May 4, 2011
Washington – The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today plans for the agency to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications – allowing inventors and businesses to have their patents processed within 12 months. It currently takes nearly three years to process the average patent. The program, called Track One, launches May 4, 2011, and is part of a new Three-Track system, which will provide applicants with greater control over when their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process.
“Track One provides a comprehensive, flexible patent application processing model to our nation’s innovators, offering different processing options that are more responsive to the real-world needs of our applicants,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos. “The Three-Track program will bring the most important new products and services to market more quickly, helping to build businesses and create new jobs in America.”
Requests for prioritized examination will initially be limited to a maximum of 10,000 applications starting May 4, 2011 through the remainder of fiscal year 2011, ending September 30. The USPTO will revisit this limit at the end of the fiscal year to evaluate whether adjustments are needed for future years.
Filing a request for prioritized examination through Track One will include a fee under 37 CFR 1.102(e) of $4,000, in addition to filing fees for the application. For smaller entities, the USPTO is working to offer a 50 percent discount on any filing fee associated with the program, as it does with many other standard processing fees.
Under the Three-Track program, patent applicants may request prioritized examination through Track One, traditional examination under the current procedures through Track Two, and for non-continuing applications first filed with the USPTO, an applicant-controlled delay for up to 30 months prior to docketing for examination under Track Three. Track Three is expected to be available to applicants by September 30, 2011.
Ron
消息來自USPTO
其他參考:
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2010/11/blog-post_26.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2010/08/mpep-70802a.html

2011年4月6日 星期三

美國專利法修法近了

更新09.20.2011
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2011/09/blog-post_13.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2011/09/ii.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2011/09/iii.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2011/09/iv.html

談了幾年的改革,主要方向是將先發明主義(first to invent)為基礎的法律改為先申請主義(first to file)的法律系統。若是這樣,直接相關的法律根據是102(a),(e)

2011.3.8美國參議會通過美國專利採取先申請主義的規則的議案,目前現行先發明主義的原始構想確實應該是保障發明人的最好方式,甚至可以透過證明先發明而撤銷已存專利(申請前已知),也保障發明人於一定公開期限內獲得自己的專利。但是先發明認定有一定困難,並且耗時耗費金錢,就成為修法的動機。這樣改變自然與其他各國同調,使得也同時保障國外專利權人、申請人的權利!

眾院司法委員會主席對參議院通過專利改革法案的評論:
In the wake of Senate passage of patent reform legislation, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) called the 95-5 vote "a victory for American innovators who create businesses, generate jobs and drive economic growth." Since the Judiciary Committee will be the first stop for this bill when it gets to the House, Rep. Smith's comments are encouraging. In the March 9 press release, he added the following:

"The Senate bill makes several important changes to our patent system. The House will introduce similar legislation this month that will help turn the ideas of American innovators into companies and jobs.

"Adopting a first-inventor-to-file standard creates certainty about patent ownership and makes it easier for American innovators to apply for patents around the world. The post-grant review process helps to reduce frivolous lawsuits filed by holders of weak or overbroad patents. And allowing for the third party submission of prior art helps prevent bad patents from being granted in the first place. These are just a few of the many provisions for which there is widespread support.

"Today's vote is an important development in our efforts toward meaningful patent reform. I look forward to achieving much-needed patent reform for American innovators and job creators."

Ron
資料提供:MG-IP Intellectual Property Law
可參考:
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/08/102a.html
http://enpan.blogspot.com/2008/09/102e.html

2011年4月1日 星期五

美國專利實務課程二



Ron

JPO延長因震災引起延遲的期限

經此次震災,JPO是照常運作,唯提出如果電子送件失敗,應以紙本送件

JPO同意有關發明專利、新型專利、設計專利與商標因為震災「直接」影響而無法及時送件(通常是指後續程序)的期限延到8.31.2011,此方案主要是針對日本東北地區(Tohoku district)

若非直接被影響,但是仍因為此次震災影響其營業而無法及時送件,期限可以延長到恢復營業後的14天,但不能超過上述8.31.2011

上述兩種情況需要提出文件請求延期!

JPO列名本次有提出紓困方案的專利局(以英文首字母排序):

APO, Austria

DKPTO, Denmark

DPMA, Germany

EPO

HIPO, Hungary

HKIPO, Hong Kong, China

IP Australia, Australia

IPO, Czech Republic

IPONZ, New Zealand

KIPO, South Korea

NBPR, Finland

NIPO, Norway

NOIP, Viet Nam

OHIM

PPO, Poland

PRV, Sweden

ROSPATENT, Russia

SPTO, Spain

TIPO, Taiwan

UKIPO, United Kingdom

USPTO, USA


Ron
資料來源:NJQ, JPO