论文部分内容阅读
最高人民法院于2011年提审了“氨氯地平、厄具沙坦复方制剂”发明专利行政纠纷案,以个案的方式对专利文件修改的适用标准作出指引。本文分析了判決涉及的专利文件修改的五个问题:如何从本领域技术人员的角度适用“直接地、毫无疑义地确定”标准、如何从立法本意角度考虑专利文件修改的限制、重新概括(二次慨括)是否会超范围、授权程序对确权程序中适用“修改超范围”的影响、无效程序中的修改方式的限定,通过对上述问题的分析阐述判决体现出来的专利文件修改标准的新发展。
In 2011, the Supreme People’s Court examined the administrative patent dispute over the amlodipine and the compound of edaravone, and gave guidance on the applicable standards for the revision of the patent documents on a case-by-case basis. This paper analyzes five questions about the modification of patent documents involved in judgments: how to apply the criterion of “directly and undoubtedly” from the perspective of those skilled in the art, how to consider the limitations of patent document modification from the perspective of legislation, Summarize (secondly) whether it will be out of range, the influence of the authorization procedure on the application of “modifying the out of range ” in the confirmation procedure, the limitation of the modification method in the invalid procedure, and the analysis of the above problems Patent documents modify the standard of new developments.