訴願程序中可核准專利範圍討論 - Ex parte Riley (PTAB 2014)

訴願程序中可核准專利範圍討論。先說結論：訴願程序中要立刻取得可核准專利，要"跳出"訴願程序。

專利申請案於專利局審查階段被核駁後，進入訴願程序為其一選項，訴願時機可參考：http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2014/10/blog-post_25.html。

其他參考：
訴願理由撰寫規定：http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2014/10/37-cfr-4137.html
修正規定參考：http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2013/01/blog-post_14.html（美國專利申請案修改的時機）
一件訴願案撰寫筆記：http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2014/10/motivation-to-combine.html

議題：訴願中的專利申請案一旦獲得"部分"可核准範圍，申請人可以提出"訴願程序以外"的訴願中修正（37CFR41.33），將可核准的附屬項寫為獨立請求項，也就是放棄了原本獨立項範圍，如此，可以終止訴願程序（PTAB），並回到USPTO取得可核准專利。

一般來說，在訴願程序中的案子理應就在訴願解決，直到訴願決定（decision of appeal），可以取得可核准決定，或是核駁決定。

不過此案例Ex parte Riley (PTAB 2014)告訴我們（All things pro網站的case study），在訴願程序中一旦取得可專利的訊息，可以在訴願以外提出修正，並撤銷終結訴願程序。

案例討論：
系爭專利申請案：12/040,323

此案例始於2012年，專利申請人對於USPTO核駁意見提出訴願，PTAB審查官審閱申請人於Brief of Appeal中的答辯後，認為專利範圍附屬項第15, 20項為可核准範圍，於是申請人回應此PTAB意見時，提出「reply brief」修正這些附屬項為獨立請求項（併入獨立項）。不過，根據37CFR41.41：『 A reply brief shall not include any new or non-admitted amendment...』。

於是，PTAB第一次依據37CFR41.41駁回此修正，理由是申請人並未對其餘"被核駁專利請求項"作出回應，而因此維持除了可核准範圍以外的這些項次的「原核駁理由」。

37 C.F.R. 41.41    Reply brief.

• (a) Timing. Appellant may file only a single reply brief to an examiner's answer within the later of two months from the date of either the examiner's answer, or a decision refusing to grant a petition under § 1.181 of this title to designate a new ground of rejection in an examiner's answer.
• (b) Content.
  • (1) A reply brief shall not include any new or non-admitted amendment, or any new or non-admitted affidavit or other Evidence. See §1.116 of this title for amendments, affidavits or other evidence filed after final action but before or on the same date of filing an appeal and § 41.33 for amendments, affidavits or other Evidence filed after the date of filing the appeal.
  • (2) Any argument raised in the reply brief which was not raised in the appeal brief, or is not responsive to an argument raised in the examiner's answer, including any designated new ground of rejection, will not be considered by the Board for purposes of the present appeal, unless good cause is shown.
• (c) Extensions of time. Extensions of time under §1.136(a) of this title for patent applications are not applicable to the time period set forth in this section. See § 1.136(b) of this title for extensions of time to reply for patent applications and § 1.550(c) of this title for extensions of time to reply for ex parte reexamination proceedings.

MPEP1206規定此階段的修正範圍，也就是引述了37C.F.R.41.33規定，在訴願階段中，特別是提出訴願理由（appeal brief）當時或是之後，可以提出的修正限於：再沒有影響其餘審理中專利範圍的前提下"刪除請求項"，或是"將附屬項改寫為獨立請求項"。

MPEP1206   Amendments and Affidavits or Other Evidence Filed With or After Appeal
37 C.F.R. 41.33   Amendments and affidavits or other evidence after appeal.

• (a) Amendments filed after the date of filing an appeal pursuant to § 41.31(a)(1) through (a)(3) and prior to the date a brief is filed pursuant to § 41.37 may be admitted as provided in § 1.116 of this title.
• (b) Amendments filed on or after the date of filing a brief pursuant to § 41.37 may be admitted:
  • (1) To cancel claims, where such cancellation does not affect the scope of any other pending claim in the proceeding, or
  • (2) To rewrite dependent claims into independent form.
• (c) All other amendments filed after the date of filing an appeal pursuant to § 41.31(a)(1) through (a)(3) will not be admitted except as permitted by §§ 41.39(b)(1), 41.50(a)(2)(i), and 41.50(b)(1).
• (d)
  • (1) An affidavit or other Evidence filed after the date of filing an appeal pursuant to § 41.31(a)(1)through (a)(3) and prior to the date of filing a brief pursuant to § 41.37 may be admitted if the examiner determines that the affidavit or other Evidence overcomes all rejections under appeal and that a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit or other Evidence is necessary and was not earlier presented has been made.
  • (2) All other affidavits or other Evidence filed after the date of filing an appeal pursuant to §41.31(a)(1) through (a)(3) will not be admitted except as permitted by §§ 41.39(b)(1), 41.50(a)(2)(i), and 41.50(b)(1).

MPEP1215 Withdrawal or Dismissal of Appeal
MPEP1215.01   Withdrawal of Appeal
...
Prior to a decision by the Board, if an applicant wishes to withdraw an application from appeal and to reopen prosecution of the application, applicant can file a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, accompanied by a submission (i.e., a reply responsive within the meaning of 37 CFR 1.111 to the last outstanding Office action) and the RCE fee set forth under 37 CFR 1.17(e).
...

簡單程序報告：
2012-01-19提出訴願理由
2012-03-05審查官回應訴願理由，其中表示claims 15, 20為可核准範圍（撤回核駁理由）

2012-05-04申請人提出Reply Brief，表達要修正專利範圍
2014-10-01（兩年後訴願決定）審查官回應申請人的Reply Brief，表示在此程序中修正不合規定，仍作出如前次核駁與可核准專利範圍的決定

2014-11-18申請人請求重啟「re-open」審查程序，同時修改專利範圍
 

2014-12-15發出核准通知

結果：
因此，欲在訴願程序中修改專利範圍使得該專利獲准，作法就是「跳出」訴願程序，包括撤回訴願（withdrawal of appeal）並提出RCE重啟審查程序，同時提出專利範圍修正；或是如此案等待訴願決定後在提出重啟程序與修正專利範圍。

後語：

1. Appeal程序相對於一般申請人面對專利終駁（final office action）的措施，如RCE，並不貴（官方費用），一般申請案的Notice of Appeal大實體800元，appeal brief沒有新增費用；第一次RCE大實體為1200元
   2/3/2015資料如下，一般申請案就那筆notice of appeal官方費用：
   
2. 不過，Appeal程序以及訴願理由的種種規定相對嚴格，代理人費用不低，使得申請人退縮，不過，效益應該在某些情況下（多次同樣核駁理由、懷疑審查委員的立場）的專利申請案還高，至少當為最後一搏後，就可以讓人"放心"
3. Appeal程序中會獲知一些可核准方向，但是不能透過訴願程序中的Reply Brief修正專利範圍，反而是要從訴願以外的程序解決。

討論案例參考：
http://allthingspros.blogspot.tw/2015/01/taking-allowable-subject-matter-during.html

Ron