→ VanDeLord:你比較倒楣 04/01 13:06
→ VanDeLord:已公開前案不就代表已知技術領域 +.+ 04/01 13:07
→ forcomet:你的美國案的確是這樣沒錯 因為你寫了D 所以要負面排除 04/01 13:23
→ forcomet:必須要說明書有提到 但是如果你說明書沒提到D 你的負面 04/01 13:23
→ forcomet:排除是有相當大的機會成功, CN的部分 就比較意外 04/01 13:24
→ forcomet:因為CN對於支持的要求是到了吹毛求疵的地步 EP的話只要 04/01 13:24
→ forcomet:有適當的解釋 EP審委接受度是高的 關於US的部分 建議可 04/01 13:25
→ forcomet:一併參考MPEP 2144的部分 04/01 13:26
→ forcomet:眼殘 看錯 可能要用別的方式去避開D, ex: only 04/01 13:33
→ forcomet:你引的MPEP後面還有一段文字 04/01 13:45
推 piglauhk:謝謝分享 04/01 15:13
推 kaikai1112:推推推 04/01 15:29
推 zweisteine:感謝指正與分享 04/01 16:35
推 madgame:日本幾乎跟台灣一樣寬鬆 允許直接排除與前案重疊的範圍 04/01 23:26
→ madgame:此外，日本和歐洲有特別寫明，允許排除「不可專利的標的」 04/01 23:26
http://www.jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki_e/t_tokkyo_e/1312-002_e.htm
日本審查基準的英文版
關於 disclaimer 的部份在 Part III
http://www.jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki_e/t_tokkyo_e/Guidelines/3.pdf
The amendment to provide a “disclaimer” in the following (i) and (ii) does
not introduce new technical matters, and the amendment is permitted.
(i) If the claimed invention overlaps with the prior art and is thus likely
to lose novelty, etc. (Article 29(1)(iii), Article 29bis or Article 39),
making an amendment to exclude only the overlap while leaving the expression
of the statement of matters stated in claims before amendment
(ii) If the claimed invention includes the term “human being” and thus does
not satisfy the requirement of the main paragraph of Article 29(1), or falls
under unpatentable grounds provided in Article 32, and said reason for refusal
is eliminated by exclusion of the term “human being,”making an amendment
to exclude only the term “human being” while leaving an expression of the
statement of matters stated in claims before amendment
參考看看
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 219.85.196.7