美專問題35 USC 112(b) - 專利
By Quanna
at 2016-03-16T14:27
at 2016-03-16T14:27
Table of Contents
各位先進大家好
想問一個關於112第二段的核駁問題
如果審查委員認為在preamble中的技術特徵沒有出現在claim的主文中
就送我一個112第二段的核駁,是不是很奇怪
節錄部分文字如下
...applicant recites limitations in the preamble which do not appear
in the body of the claims. The preamble recites the purpose of a processor
or the intended use of a structure and when read in the context
of the entire claim, recites limitations of the claim, or, if the
claim preamble is necessory to give life, meaning, and vatality to the
claim, then the claim preamble should be construed as if in the
balance of the claim.
.....Currently features which appear in the preamble are absent in
the body of the claims (e.g., OOXXOOXX ) and no correlation/ and or
correspondence of said features which appear in the preamble are
found in the body of the claims. Furthermore no circuitry and or
connections thereof, as implied by the electrical connection,
is noted as being recited.
上述OOXXOOXX是指兩個元件之間的連接關係
我覺得奇怪的點在於
1. preamble 如果沒有帶給 body任何限制的話,不是有可能被認為沒有專利權重嗎?
誠如審查委員在官文中所述,preamble 說明了這個claim的用途或目的
當preamble的文字對整個claim而言是必要時,解釋整個claim時就會
考慮到preamble...
例如 preamble的文字或元件有被引述到claim body中時,此時解釋claim時
就無可避免的會考慮到preamble
以本案而言,若preamble的文字沒有被引述到claim body,應該可視為沒有
專利權重的一段文字吧,有必要發個112的核駁嗎?
2. 我目前是傾向於刪除OOXX這段話
因為我覺得如果preamble只是要單純解釋claimed invention的用途的話
在preamble裡面寫兩個元件之間的連結關係也頗怪的
說不定審查委員也是覺得這樣很怪所以發個112的核駁
以上,我只是想確定一下我的想法,有誤的話請用力鞭,謝謝
by the way
另外查到 MPEP 2181 有寫到preamble用功能手段用語撰寫時
審委用112核駁是合理的
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2181.html
還查到
MPEP 2173.05(e)-III 有寫到
claim主文引述了preambl所沒有的元件時,並不會使整個claim不明確
不過我這次遇到的是preamble的元件連結關係,沒有被claim主文引述到
兩者相反XD
--
想問一個關於112第二段的核駁問題
如果審查委員認為在preamble中的技術特徵沒有出現在claim的主文中
就送我一個112第二段的核駁,是不是很奇怪
節錄部分文字如下
...applicant recites limitations in the preamble which do not appear
in the body of the claims. The preamble recites the purpose of a processor
or the intended use of a structure and when read in the context
of the entire claim, recites limitations of the claim, or, if the
claim preamble is necessory to give life, meaning, and vatality to the
claim, then the claim preamble should be construed as if in the
balance of the claim.
.....Currently features which appear in the preamble are absent in
the body of the claims (e.g., OOXXOOXX ) and no correlation/ and or
correspondence of said features which appear in the preamble are
found in the body of the claims. Furthermore no circuitry and or
connections thereof, as implied by the electrical connection,
is noted as being recited.
上述OOXXOOXX是指兩個元件之間的連接關係
我覺得奇怪的點在於
1. preamble 如果沒有帶給 body任何限制的話,不是有可能被認為沒有專利權重嗎?
誠如審查委員在官文中所述,preamble 說明了這個claim的用途或目的
當preamble的文字對整個claim而言是必要時,解釋整個claim時就會
考慮到preamble...
例如 preamble的文字或元件有被引述到claim body中時,此時解釋claim時
就無可避免的會考慮到preamble
以本案而言,若preamble的文字沒有被引述到claim body,應該可視為沒有
專利權重的一段文字吧,有必要發個112的核駁嗎?
2. 我目前是傾向於刪除OOXX這段話
因為我覺得如果preamble只是要單純解釋claimed invention的用途的話
在preamble裡面寫兩個元件之間的連結關係也頗怪的
說不定審查委員也是覺得這樣很怪所以發個112的核駁
以上,我只是想確定一下我的想法,有誤的話請用力鞭,謝謝
by the way
另外查到 MPEP 2181 有寫到preamble用功能手段用語撰寫時
審委用112核駁是合理的
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2181.html
還查到
MPEP 2173.05(e)-III 有寫到
claim主文引述了preambl所沒有的元件時,並不會使整個claim不明確
不過我這次遇到的是preamble的元件連結關係,沒有被claim主文引述到
兩者相反XD
--
Tags:
專利
All Comments
By David
at 2016-03-16T18:47
at 2016-03-16T18:47
By Xanthe
at 2016-03-18T14:02
at 2016-03-18T14:02
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2016-03-19T08:45
at 2016-03-19T08:45
By Jake
at 2016-03-24T02:19
at 2016-03-24T02:19
By Bennie
at 2016-03-26T15:02
at 2016-03-26T15:02
By Daniel
at 2016-03-30T22:18
at 2016-03-30T22:18
By Delia
at 2016-04-02T19:14
at 2016-04-02T19:14
By Vanessa
at 2016-04-05T02:37
at 2016-04-05T02:37
By Hedwig
at 2016-04-05T20:06
at 2016-04-05T20:06
By John
at 2016-04-06T02:32
at 2016-04-06T02:32
By Edward Lewis
at 2016-04-06T16:31
at 2016-04-06T16:31
By Rosalind
at 2016-04-09T06:58
at 2016-04-09T06:58
By Zanna
at 2016-04-10T11:34
at 2016-04-10T11:34
Related Posts
參考資料影片
By Zora
at 2016-03-13T01:30
at 2016-03-13T01:30
台南宏景
By Tracy
at 2016-03-12T17:54
at 2016-03-12T17:54
專利權若改為"分享利益之權"會如何?
By Belly
at 2016-03-12T06:21
at 2016-03-12T06:21
美國專利申請半年後向USPTO提出提早公開
By Andy
at 2016-03-10T21:02
at 2016-03-10T21:02
專利家族樹/族譜
By Jake
at 2016-03-08T09:32
at 2016-03-08T09:32