當claim 中所請求特徵為nothing? - 專利
By Ingrid
at 2008-01-26T12:14
at 2008-01-26T12:14
Table of Contents
最近撰寫美國專利稿時發生一個很特別的問題
小弟才疏學淺 把問題提出來請教各方前輩
若發明主要與先前技術的差異是在於不需要某個元件即可運作
而我在independent claim中界定如下特徵
A connted to B without C
也就是說我要主張一個 無須透過C元件的A B元件的直接連接關係
這種猶如nothing的"無須透過C元件"的特徵
是否為USPTO IPO或是其他國家專利局所接受
美國claim中元件幾乎都是要眼見為憑的出現在drawings中
那麼是 nothing 般的C元件 也必須想辦法畫在drawing 裡頭?
若是沒有美國112法條的問題
那這樣寫法的claim的scope又是什麼
與引證案的關係又是什麼?
是否有前輩了解關於這樣的claim方式的Case Law之資訊
請不吝賜教
看過類似的寫法的類似觀念的claim寫法
A selected from a group consisting of 1, 2, 3 .. and being free of 4 and 5
也就是 A可以是 1, 2, 3 組成 但是 排除了 4 和 5
但這種界定方式本質又與我前面提到直接排除C元件的撰寫方式不盡相同
畢竟 A 已經明確界定可以是 1 2 3 A本質上已經是實體不算nothing
只是A 不在 4 和 5範圍內
有上述疑問是前幾天有同事問我這方面的問題
而我發現我去年一件只有送DE發明的案件也寫了without XXX 的 independent claim
也已經準備要准專利
現在回想起來 這件沒有送去比較嚴苛的USPTO審一下很可惜
小弟的邏輯可能沒有正確 請各位前輩指正和解惑
--
Tags:
專利
All Comments
By Belly
at 2008-01-28T05:58
at 2008-01-28T05:58
By Lily
at 2008-01-29T04:38
at 2008-01-29T04:38
By Edith
at 2008-01-29T06:46
at 2008-01-29T06:46
By Ivy
at 2008-01-31T03:11
at 2008-01-31T03:11
By Enid
at 2008-02-01T01:13
at 2008-02-01T01:13
By Zanna
at 2008-02-03T11:38
at 2008-02-03T11:38
By Irma
at 2008-02-04T19:43
at 2008-02-04T19:43
By Margaret
at 2008-02-06T06:26
at 2008-02-06T06:26
By Bennie
at 2008-02-07T10:16
at 2008-02-07T10:16
By Cara
at 2008-02-12T05:58
at 2008-02-12T05:58
By Olivia
at 2008-02-13T20:07
at 2008-02-13T20:07
By Sierra Rose
at 2008-02-16T18:28
at 2008-02-16T18:28
By Tom
at 2008-02-21T00:28
at 2008-02-21T00:28
By Sierra Rose
at 2008-02-25T01:45
at 2008-02-25T01:45
By Emma
at 2008-02-25T15:11
at 2008-02-25T15:11
By Donna
at 2008-02-26T01:53
at 2008-02-26T01:53
Related Posts
請問美國的Final OA
By Tracy
at 2008-01-24T00:32
at 2008-01-24T00:32
請問美國的Final OA
By Ingrid
at 2008-01-23T23:47
at 2008-01-23T23:47
請教~~專利事務所業務一職
By Susan
at 2008-01-22T10:09
at 2008-01-22T10:09
翻譯問題
By Jessica
at 2008-01-21T10:13
at 2008-01-21T10:13
請問美國的Final OA
By Xanthe
at 2008-01-19T01:24
at 2008-01-19T01:24