Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  10 /94 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 10 /94 Next Page
Page Background

10

本月專題

論說明書中所載之先前技術—以智慧財產法院行政判決

99

年度

行專訴字第

129

號、

103

年度行專訴字第

84

號為探討核心

105.04 智慧財產權月刊 VOL.208

ᗫʘ

ה

Ϟʊٝ༟ৃdԨਗ਼Չ੔ഗ

ߕ

਷ਖ਼лਠᅺ҅i༈Ԭʊٝ༟ৃ౧ᚣ˙όᏐԱኽ

1.97

€

b



-

€

d

ၾ

1.98

ʘ஝֛f

ߕ

਷׵ʞᗙ҅జѓʕ͵੶ሜՉਖ਼л

ج

׼֛dਖ਼л

͡ሗɛϞ່ਕ౧ᚣ

ה

Ϟʊٝʘ΋

ۃ

Ҧஔ˖ᘠd˸Դਖ਼лᄲ

ݟ

ɛࡰӔ֛

ה

ሗ೯׼݊

щՈϞਖ਼л׌dϾਖ਼л͡ሗɛ

ۆ

݊ਗ਼༈Ԭʊٝ΋

ۃ

Ҧஔ˸༟ৃ౧ᚣ௓జࣣ˙ό௓

ߕ

਷ਖ਼лਠᅺ҅˸ᄵБϤ່ਕ

13

f

二、違反義務之法律效果

ݲ

e˚͉eᒵ਷ʿʕ਷ɽ௔

Ӌਖ਼л͡ሗɛᏐਗ਼

౻ߠ

Ҧஔা༱׵ਖ਼л͡

ሗࣩlzf߰͊ୌΥ༈

Ӌd

ۆ

˚͉ၾᒵ਷ʚ˸ࣨჶਖ਼л͡ሗࣩiᆄ

ݲ

ၾʕ਷ɽ

ۆ

݊࿴ϓࣨჶ€

refusal

ਖ਼л͡ሗࣩၾਖ਼лᛆೌࣖ€

invalidation

ÿਖ਼лᄻ˟

€

revocation

ʘԫ͟fਖ਼л͡ሗɛ̙ᔟ͟Υቇʘ

͍˙όд؂ࣨჶଣ͟

14

fϤ̮d

ʕ਷ɽ௔ਖ਼л

ج

36

ૢୋ

2

ධ஝֛dᄲ

ݟ

ژ

̙˸

Ӌ͡ሗɛ׵ܸ֛ಂࠢlz౤

Զ਷̮ᄲ

ݟ

༟ࣘd͡ሗɛೌΥ

ج

ଣ͟׵ಂࠢlz౤Զ٫d͡ሗࣩਗ਼஗࿞ΫfЇ׵ਖ਼

л͡ሗɛ׵

ߕ

਷͡ሗਖ਼лཀ೻ʕd߰͊༐ྼਗ਼

ה

Ϟʊٝ΋

ۃ

Ҧஔ˸༟ৃ౧ᚣ௓జ

ࣣ€

IDS)

௓జഗ

ߕ

਷ਖ਼лਠᅺ҅dෛ

ۆܝ

ึᅂᚤਖ਼лᛆʘБԴf

三、申復、修正

߰༈΋

ۃ

Ҧஔʘ

͍සऒʿ

ה

ሗ೯׼ʘ

౻ߠ

ҦஔdԨೌऒʿ೯׼͉Ԓd΢਷ɽ

εΝจ

͍fᆄ

ޟݲ

ЇΝจһ౬௰ટ

ڐ

ʘ΋

ۃ

ҦஔdШʔ̙൵ዚᓒ࢝͡ሗᅺٙ

15

i

ɦᒵ਷Ⴉ

މ

΋

ۃ

Ҧஔ༟ৃ̋ɝ׵Ⴍ׼ࣣlz€Էνjʮක໮dԨʔึ஗ൖ

މ

ˏආอ

13

U.S. patent law imposes a duty upon patent applicants to disclose all known prior art references that

would be material to the patent examiner in determining patentability. Applicants fulfil that duty by

disclosing the references in an Information Disclosure Statement. Five IP offices,

supra

note 3, at 6.

14

The EPO, JPO, KIPO and SIPO require patent applicants to incorporate background art into

application. Failure to meet the requirement is a reason for refusal in the JPO and KIPO, while it can

under certain circumstances lead to both refusal and invalidation/revocation in the EPO and SIPO.

Applicants can overcome the reason for refusal through appropriate amendment of the references to the

prior art. Five IP offices,

supra

note 3, at 6.

15

The insertion into the statement of prior art of references to documents identified subsequently, for

example by the search report, is required, where necessary, to put the invention into proper perspective.

Under the EPC system it is considered that the subsequent inclusion of such a summary in the

description does not contravene Art. 123(2) EPC, which prohibits the amendment of the application in

a way that it contains subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed. Five

IP offices,

supra

note 3, at 6.