coupled to 與 electrically connected … - 專利

Megan avatar
By Megan
at 2008-01-16T07:48

Table of Contents

※ 引述《wqk (wqk)》之銘言:
: 請問各位,這兩個terms如果在說明書沒有特別定義,在claim construction的範圍上
: 有什麼差異?
: 我聽說coupled to 範圍比較大,但有哪位先進知道兩者的差異處何在嗎?
: thx a lot


在進行claim construction時
對於有爭議的claim用語,其文義解釋必須根據內部證據及外部證據
因此在解釋 "coupled to" 或 "electrically connected to" 的範圍時
會受到 specification 以及 prosecution histroy 的限制
上述兩個用語並沒有說誰的範圍一定比較大
在不同的case,常會有不同的解釋
主要的爭議多半落在 "直接或間接"、"機構性或電性"...
只能說依據大部分判決的結果, "coupled to"的範圍會比較大
以下僅摘錄一些判決結果作為參考
基本上,最好把整個判決的來龍去脈了解清楚
而不要把判決的結果當作是上述兩用語的標準定義

Johnson Worldwide Associates, Inc. v. Zebco Corp.
(claim term “coupled” would not be restricted to a mechanical or
physical coupling based on an inference from the written description,
but could include electrical coupling as there was nothing in the
specification or prosecution history to clearly limit couple from its
broad meaning of connecting.)

Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc v. ev3 Inc.
(based on intrinsic evidence construing “couple” to require direct
connection—“The term ‘coupled’ appears in claim 1.
Boston Scientific proposes that the term be construed as ‘directly
or indirectly linked.’ ev3 argues that ‘coupled’ should be construed
as ‘the filter must be directly attached to the wire and not be
attached to a tube that rides on the wire.’ After reviewing the
intrinsic evidence, and the prosecution history in particular,
the Court construes oupled’as adjacent and directly connected to.’”)

NTP, Inc. v. Research In Motion, Ltd.
(construing “connected to” in a claim limitation reciting “
each mobile device comprising a wireless device connected to a mobile
processor” as not necessarily precluding the wireless device and mobile
processor from being located in same physical structure and stating
“Webster's Third New International Dictionary 480 (1993) defines ‘
connected’ as ‘to join, fasten, or link together.’ Although
‘connected' more strongly connotes a physical link between the mobile
processor and the wireless receiver than does the term ‘transfer,’
it still does not require that the mobile processor and wireless receiver
be physically disposed in separate housings. A 'onnection’can occur
between these two devices regardless of whether they are housed separately
or together. Indeed, the two components could be connected, joined, or
linked together by wires or other electrical conductors and still be
located in the same housing or even on the same circuit board.")

--
Tags: 專利

All Comments

David avatar
By David
at 2008-01-18T13:58
推 建議給個m吧
Mary avatar
By Mary
at 2008-01-23T11:28
有判例有推
Elma avatar
By Elma
at 2008-01-26T10:49
推!
Quintina avatar
By Quintina
at 2008-01-30T00:31
原PO乃本板專利強人也 不推對不起台灣智財界!
Hedda avatar
By Hedda
at 2008-02-03T21:07
囧...只是手邊有些資料,與版友分享一下自己的看法而已
Bennie avatar
By Bennie
at 2008-02-04T02:10
不過,specification的寫法以及OA的答辯技巧真的很重要!
Rebecca avatar
By Rebecca
at 2008-02-05T09:02
electrically connected跟connected不知道有沒有差喔?
Brianna avatar
By Brianna
at 2008-02-06T03:40
也謝謝你的資料,才知道有不少爭議。當初學到的還以為就是
Brianna avatar
By Brianna
at 2008-02-09T14:04
'定義'了呢。
Olga avatar
By Olga
at 2008-02-13T08:56
electrically connected 跟 connected 一定不一樣 XD
Eden avatar
By Eden
at 2008-02-18T03:09
前者係以"electrically"此一現象或功能,限定"connected"
Dorothy avatar
By Dorothy
at 2008-02-18T09:13
後者則無 ,差異甚明
Rebecca avatar
By Rebecca
at 2008-02-22T09:55
電性連接,感覺就是只要電過的去都算!
George avatar
By George
at 2008-02-25T05:01
那意思是jerico舉的connected沒有疑義囉?有疑義需多討論的
Necoo avatar
By Necoo
at 2008-02-28T02:41
是electrically connected囉(如blueson討論的)?
Rebecca avatar
By Rebecca
at 2008-03-03T13:54
sorry..沒仔細看blueson的例子..例子好像是探討couple的
Ida avatar
By Ida
at 2008-03-05T18:22
意義。
Jack avatar
By Jack
at 2008-03-09T01:09
根據手邊七.八個判決,coupled跟connected要看內部證據較準
Edward Lewis avatar
By Edward Lewis
at 2008-03-11T16:48
至於electrically connected,如d大所述,有"電性"的限制
William avatar
By William
at 2008-03-13T20:38
個人較偏好在電路案,寫成"耦接",並翻成"coupled to"
Selena avatar
By Selena
at 2008-03-14T21:26
通訊案就寫"連接",翻成"connected"
Agatha avatar
By Agatha
at 2008-03-18T04:40
機構案則習慣將元件上位化,用包含,再敘述各作動件的動作
Kumar avatar
By Kumar
at 2008-03-19T18:58
不偏好在機構案claim中去寫"A連接B",會限制機構連結關係
Kama avatar
By Kama
at 2008-03-21T06:12
謝謝你的說明,我原先是在問電路案,有沒有加electrically
Bethany avatar
By Bethany
at 2008-03-21T17:22
有沒有差..我知道是有加是限定為電性,但電路案若沒加
Wallis avatar
By Wallis
at 2008-03-24T12:09
會不會意思範圍比較不同?
Emily avatar
By Emily
at 2008-03-29T09:53
所以剛剛發了另一文,分析你舉的三個例子,但還是不能確定
Vanessa avatar
By Vanessa
at 2008-04-03T07:08
很多地方,可能我例子看得不夠多。
Vanessa avatar
By Vanessa
at 2008-04-06T00:21
電路案會寫耦接真的我會覺得是考量到範圍這點,通訊案是
或其他地方是比較少看到耦接..不知道是否電路案比較特殊
Skylar Davis avatar
By Skylar Davis
at 2008-04-10T09:35
如果是相當常見且習知的電路元件或電路單元"電性連接"
Frederic avatar
By Frederic
at 2008-04-11T21:41
我想還是傾向用"連接".為什麼呢 因為即便是寫claim
Olga avatar
By Olga
at 2008-04-16T06:31
物件連接一定有其用意在,例如常寫"其係用以.."
Una avatar
By Una
at 2008-04-19T14:27
我想 由於大部分的情況 在前後文內多少還會敘述其功能
Charlotte avatar
By Charlotte
at 2008-04-21T02:59
若以前後文明顯地看得出其功能 且該物件亦為習知元件
Odelette avatar
By Odelette
at 2008-04-25T11:28
以小弟之見解 猜想應該可以考慮不加"electrically"
Blanche avatar
By Blanche
at 2008-04-30T03:02
以稍稍擴大權利要求項之範圍 (若審查官有意見 再補即可)
Hazel avatar
By Hazel
at 2008-05-03T21:56
就我以前得知的~加electrically是台灣從電性連接翻的~而
Enid avatar
By Enid
at 2008-05-07T15:52
電性連接是因為有人覺得"不是只是連接而已"所以出現電性
Isla avatar
By Isla
at 2008-05-10T19:39
連接這個詞~這是我以前好奇問一些資深從業人員得到的答案
Jessica avatar
By Jessica
at 2008-05-14T20:41
推!!!

coupled to 與 electrically connected …

Ina avatar
By Ina
at 2008-01-15T22:13
※ 引述《wqk (wqk)》之銘言: : 請問各位,這兩個terms如果在說明書沒有特別定義,在claim construction的範圍上 : 有什麼差異? : 我聽說coupled to 範圍比較大,但有哪位先進知道兩者的差異處何在嗎? : thx a lot 之前處理案子的時候,曾經有兩條獨立項 一 ...

coupled to 與 electrically connected to的不同

George avatar
By George
at 2008-01-15T21:18
請問各位,這兩個terms如果在說明書沒有特別定義,在claim construction的範圍上 有什麼差異? 我聽說coupled to 範圍比較大,但有哪位先進知道兩者的差異處何在嗎? thx a lot - ...

做專利工程師好嗎???

Bethany avatar
By Bethany
at 2008-01-15T13:40
如題 想問問版上前輩 你們覺得做這一行好嗎 覺得有賺到該賺到的嗎? 有前景嗎? 可以分享一下給晚輩知道嗎? (如果不是去大型事務所有差嗎?) -- http://www.wretch.cc/album/ericjuju 澳洲 英國 紐西蘭 一步一步把它完成吧!! 衝!!! - ...

舉發的期限

Hamiltion avatar
By Hamiltion
at 2008-01-14T21:22
恕刪.. 對不起 我再說明仔細一點 問題就出在這邊 根據行政程序法第92條 [...行政處分係指行政機關就公法上具體事件所為之決定或其他公權力措施 ^^^^^^^^ 而對外直接發生法律效果之單方面行政行為] ^^^^^^^^ 因此 b ...

舉發的期限

Candice avatar
By Candice
at 2008-01-13T18:57
感謝duwaptt大大的回答 ※ 引述《duwaptt (uu)》之銘言: : ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ : 問題就出在這邊 根據行政程序法第92條 : [...行政處分係指行政機關就公法上具體事件所為之決定或其他.....] : ...