enpan's Patent & Linux practice: 延續討論：證明發明完成日為"發明經由合理的努力並持續致力於付諸實現"

2021年11月11日星期四

延續討論：證明發明完成日為"發明經由合理的努力並持續致力於付諸實現"

本篇提到幾個證明發明完成日的幾個條件：

- conception（構想）

- reduction to practice（付諸實現）

- constructive reduction to practice（我翻為：建設性的付諸實現）

- actual reduction to practice（實際的付諸實現）

- diligence to constructive reduction to practice（我翻為：致力於建設性地付諸實現，這是強調發明持續進行中）

案件資訊：

上訴人/專利權人：ATI TECHNOLOGIES ULC

參加人：ANDREI IANCU, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

系爭專利：US7,742,053、US6,897,871、US7,327,369（IPR2015-00325, IPR2015-00326, IPR2015-00330）

判決日：April 11, 2019

主要議題是，到要怎樣的條件才能證明在＂發明完成日＂，或是證明＂先發明（prior invention）＂，本篇是延續先前已經討論的案例ATI Tech ULC v. Iancu (Fed. Cir. 2019)的後續筆記。

之前已經報導的案例 - 連續努力而實現發明的條件 - ATI Tech ULC v. Iancu (Fed. Cir. 2019)（https://enpan.blogspot.com/2020/11/ati-tech-ulc-v-iancu-fed-cir-2019.html）

本案緣起LGE（LG Electronics, Inc.）引用先前技術向PTAB對系爭專利（部分專利範圍）提起IPR異議程序，主要是102, 103議題，而專利權人ATI提起的答辯理由是，系爭專利早於LGE引用的主要引證案，提出證據證明發明概念發起、付諸實現與努力（conception, reduction to practice, and diligence）都早於主要引證案。IPR的結果有異議成立也有不成立的。

---相關規定---

相關規定在37 CFR 1.131 Affidavit or declaration of prior invention or to disqualify commonly owned patent or published application as prior art.

摘錄其中(b)款：The showing of facts for an oath or declaration under paragraph (a) of this section shall be such, in character and weight, as to establish reduction to practice prior to the effective date of the reference, or conception of the invention prior to the effective date of the reference coupled with due diligence from prior to said date to a subsequent reduction to practice or to the filing of the application. Original exhibits of drawings or records, or photocopies thereof, must accompany and form part of the affidavit or declaration or their absence must be satisfactorily explained.

----------------

審視ATI提出證據後，PTAB同意系爭專利'053發明概念構想不晚於"August 24, 2001"（這是引證案申請日，'053有效申請日：September 29, 2003），概念（conception）與建設性的付諸實現（constructive reduction to practice）並沒有爭議，但是卻認為ATI並未致力並實際付諸實現（diligence and actual reduction to practice）；針對系爭專利'871，PTAB同意構想於引證案申請日之前，但並未證明在引證案之前已經實際付諸實現與持續致力於付諸實現；針對系爭專利'369，PTAB同意在引證案之前已經有構想並建設性的付諸實現，但並未證明已經實際付諸實現與致力於付諸實現。

先解釋何謂先發明，主要根據是37 C.F.R. §1.131，此稱為"swearing back"或"swearing be-hind"（回溯宣誓），亦規範於MPEP 715：MPEP 715 Swearing Behind a Reference — Affidavit or Declaration Under 37 CFR 1.131(a)，其中條件適用在專利面對之前但不同的先前參考文獻阻礙時。

發明是否完成於證據之前？判斷標準是：

(a) 當申請案獲專利的任一申請專利範圍被駁回時，申請人/專利權人可以提交宣誓書，證明被駁回的發明在參考文獻的有效日期（effective date）或任何活動之前。

(a) When any claim of an application or a patent under reexamination is rejected, the applicant or patent owner may submit an appropriate oath or declaration to establish invention of the subject matter of the rejected claim prior to the effective date of the reference or activity on which the rejection is based.

(b) 證明宣誓中提交的事實，應考量發明"reduction to practice（付諸實現）"在參考文獻之前，或是發明概念（conception）在參考文獻的有效日期之前，並且這是要致力於付諸實現（"prior conception coupled with due diligence"），延續到之後提出專利申請案。

(b) The showing of facts for an oath or declaration under paragraph (a) of this section shall be such, in character and weight, as to establish reduction to practice prior to the effective date of the reference, or conception of the invention prior to the effective date of the reference coupled with due diligence from prior to said date to a subsequent reduction to practice or to the filing of the application.

Diligence（這裡講的是＂連續致力於＂）的標準：申請人不僅要證明在證據之前已經發展出發明構想，還要合理延續活動以讓發明付諸實現（reasonably continued activity to reduce the invention to practice），以下列舉其他案例法院意見，用不同的英文表示類似的意思，如"continuously exercised reasonable diligence through the critical period"，我解釋為，要證明有效的發明完成日，要證明發明經由合理的努力並持續致力於付諸實現。