Defining the Scope of Search and Examination



Similar documents
Part II. Application not searched. Application not searched due to the presence of certain subject matter

Takao Matsui Patent Attorney, Okabe International Patent Office, (Tokyo Japan) Japan Patent Attorneys Association (JPAA)

dependent independent claims

CANADIAN PATENT AGENT QUALIFYING EXAMINATION GUIDE TO WRITING THE PATENT AGENT EXAM PAPER A PATENT DRAFTING

Second medical use patents

European Patent Office / State Intellectual Property Office of the People s Republic of China

Patentability of inventions in the field of food industry: search and examination practice at the EPO

February Euro-PCT applications: Claim amendment and other issues

GUIDELINES FOR PATENT EXAMINATION IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA

Case 8:04-cv MJG Document 142 Filed 08/16/05 Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Patent Litigation in Europe - Presence and Future

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Yearbook. Building IP value in the 21st century. Beyond the unitary patent: nothing new under the sun?

Date of decision 15 July Case number T 0208/ Application number EP G06F15/20

Comments on Draft Guidelines. for Examination of. Patent Applications in the Field of Pharmaceuticals. before the Indian Patent Office (IPO)

European Biotech Patent Law Update

Meta Binder Samson & Partner

Computer-Implemented Inventions EPO

Technical Writing - Definition of Technological Invention Summary

How to Get a Eurasian Patent

WIPO/AIPPI Conference on Client Privilege in Intellectual Property Professional Advice

Governance of the European Patent System

The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys

Mark W. Wasserman, Matthew Robertson Sheldon, Richard D. Holzheimer, Reed Smith LLP, Falls Church, VA, for Plaintiffs.

IP Litigation in Europe and in Germany

PROCEDURES AND COSTS FOR PATENTS

European Patenting Practice... with a view on USPTO Differences. Michael Schneider European Patent Attorney Eversheds, Munich

IN THE MATTER OF International Application No PCT/GB 2003/ in the name of PENIFE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Intellectual Property Protection for Computer Software in the United States

J.A.Kemp & Co. London. Munich. Oxford

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 29 September /09 LIMITE PI 93

How To Re-Think The New Us Patent Fee Regime

Comments on the. Draft of a Decision of the Administrative Committee on

Invention Analysis and Claiming, A Patent Lawyer s Guide. Effective patent claim drafting attempts to balance discrete disclosure of all elements

South East of Process Main Building / 1F. North East of Process Main Building / 1F. At 14:05 April 16, Sample not collected

What every product manager should know about Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks. Varun A. Shah Patent Attorney

MEDICAL/PHARMACEUTICAL INVENTIONS. A comparative study Europe China

Scuola di dottorato in Scienze molecolari Information literacy in chemistry Patents

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION OF MALAYSIA

35 USC 101: Statutory Requirements and Four Categories of Invention August 2015

Patents for software?

Annex I Common Requirements for All Types of Documents

Patentability of Business Method Inventions and Inventions with Non-technical Features in Japan versus the US and Europe

REASONS FOR DECISION

DECISION OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COUNCIL of 15 December 2015 adopting the Rules relating to Fees for Unitary Patent Protection

Maine Cernota & Rardin, Registered Patent Attorneys 547 Amherst St., 3 rd Floor, Nashua, NH info@mcr-ip.com

How To Teach A Patent Course On Life Sciences

Game Is Not Over Yet: Software Patents and Their Impact on Video Game Industry in Europe

Paper Entered: June 3, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

OWNERSHIP TO EMPLOYEE INVENTIONS WHEN THERE IS NO WRITTEN AGREEMENT

Regulations under the Patent Cooperation Treaty. (as in force from July 1, 2015)

Patents in Europe 2013/2014

Patents on Seeds and Animals, Eggs & Bacon, Tomatoes and Melons

DOUBLE PATENTING CONSIDERATIONS by Mark Cohen

GENERAL TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT (GTE)

Meeting of International Authorities under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

The ARABIC version is the official version LAW NO ON THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY ( AS MODIFIED AND SUPPLEMENTED BY LAW 31.

Do s And Don ts For Claim Drafting: A Litigator s Perspective

Training for Patent Professionals EQE BASIC LEGAL DISTANCE LEARNING

International Patent Litigation and Jurisdiction. Study of Hypothetical Question 1 Under the Hague Draft Convention and Japanese Laws

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

PATENTS ACT IN THE MATTER OF Application No. GB in the name of Pintos Global Services Ltd DECISION. Introduction

Diagnostic Method Patents:

(51) Int Cl.: G06F 11/14 ( )

Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 USC 101: August 2012 Update

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY CORPORATION HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY TANGIBLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT RESULTS HANDLING REGULATIONS

Training for Patent Professionals EQE PAPER C 3-DAY METHODOLOGY COURSE

Strong patents as a basis for successful patent litigation

ASEAN IPR SME Helpdesk Guide: Protecting your IP at Trade Fairs in Southeast Asia. Contents. 1. Protecting your IP at trade fairs. 2.

TEPZZ 65Z79 A_T EP A1 (19) (11) EP A1. (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION published in accordance with Art.

Germany Allemagne Deutschland. Report Q189. in the name of the German Group by Jochen EHLERS, Thorsten BAUSCH and Martin KÖHLER

QUALITY MANAGEMENT MANUAL PROCESSES FOR

JTA BULLETIN, Issue no. 7

Shigeru ITOH Itoh & Associates

(Effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after December 15, 2009) CONTENTS

PATENTS. Pharmaceutical Product Patenting Strategies

Patents for software?

German Patent Law (last amended by the Laws of July 16 and August 6, 1998) TABLE OF CONTENTS Sections Part I: The Patent 1-25 Part II: The Patent

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Patent Basics for Non-Patent Attorneys October 11, 2005

Chapter 2 Fields of Intellectual Property Protection

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT)

Decision of Technical Board of Appeal dated 21 April 2004 T 258/

Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others

Litigation schemes and proof of debt schemes: Managing conflicts of interest

Homework 1. Q1a). Describe how you could test the ph of a solution and obtain its ph value.

Non-Patent Document Database for. Examination of Software-Related Inventions

Chapter Two Procedure on the Application for an Invention

5/4/2011. Overview. Claim Drafting. Patent Claims: Example. Patent Claims. Patent Claims 1. Patent Claims 2

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON AUDITING (UK AND IRELAND) 200

A BILL FOR AN ACT BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII: 2 scale, outdoor commercial agricultural operations in Hawaii has

Decree on Utility Model Rights

CANADIAN PATENT AGENT QUALIFYING EXAMINATION GUIDE TO WRITING THE PATENT AGENT EXAM PAPER B PATENT VALIDITY

TEPZZ 87_546A T EP A2 (19) (11) EP A2 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION. (51) Int Cl.: G05B 19/05 ( )

The Challenge of Machine Translation of Patent Specifications and the Approach of the European Patent Office

PATENT INFORMATION. Cameron IP

Discovery Devices. Rule 26 requires the automatic disclosure of a host of basic information regarding the case

LENDER S INTEREST IN CONTRACTOR S (Builder's Risk) INSURANCE

Writing Reports. Gary Fishman Pearlfisher International

Transcription:

Claims Drafting : Defining the Scope of Search and Examination Kuala Lumpur, November 2011 Dr. Wolfgang Tauchert Presiding Judge (German Fed. Patent Court) ret. 1 Claims Drafting Claims Form and Function 1) Function Art. 84 EPC: The claims shall define the matter for which protection is sought. They shall be - clear, - concise and - supported by the description. Art. 69(1) EPC: The extent of the protection conferred by a European patent t or a European patent t application shall be determined by the terms of the claims. Nevertheless, the description and drawings shall be used to interpret the claims (see also Protocol to Art. 69). 2

Claims Function : ( TheNameoftheGameistheClaim ) (The Rule 29(1) (Guidelines C-III, 2.1) The claim shall define the matter for which protection is sought in terms of the technical features of the invention ; (similar il in other legislations). l 1) Claims define the subject of protection therefore and corresponding (broad/narrow) 2) claims define equally the subject of search and examination, 3 Claims Function : ( TheNameoftheGameistheClaim ) (The Claims shall define the invention by words. i.e. by the technical (structural and/or functional) features of the invention There is no invention outside the claims (even if it were, it wouldn t matter; this sounds natural, but is often overseen in the process of examination). The skilled person (assessing patentability) has the same level of knowledge and experience in understanding and interpreting the claimed application and the state of the art 4

Form of a Claim Basic structure: - Introducing part (Category, purpose..) - body (specific legal description of the invention by structural and/or functional features) - link (words/phrases like comprising, including, consisting of. - one part claim - )or characterized in (- two part claim) 5 Form of a Claim Dependent - / independent claim Formally: with / without reference to another claim within the same category Substantive: Further specification of an independent claim. Important: An independent claim has to present an independent solution of the underlying objective problem of the invention. Otherwise: Lack of Unity! 6

Form of a Claim One part - /twopartclaim Dependent - / independent claim Basic types (categories) of claims: 1) Type entity: Product, apparatus, device. 2) Type activity: Process, method, use. Further on: Special types, e.g.: 1st and 2nd medical use, product-by- process, Markush grouping, disclaimer 7 Form of a Claim: One Part / Two Part (Rule 21(1)b EPO Guidelines) One part claim: Presentation of the essential characteristics of the invention without structure as to state of the Art. Example: Apparatus comprising features A, B, C, D.. Two part claim: Presentation of the essential characteristics of the invention with a structure according to the state of the art (so far as known) Apparatus with features A, B, characterized by features C, D. characterized in that features C, D are comprised. Invention comprises all features of the claim! 8

Form of a Claim: One Part / Two Part - Handling One part claim: Each of the essential characteristics of the invention (= the claim!) has to be referred to in state of the Art, as far as known. Example: Apparatus comprising features A, B, C, D.. Doc. 1) )provides an apparatus showing showing feature A; Doc. 2) shows an apparatus with feature C). General: If there is no clear single starting document in the state of the art giving the base fort the invention, then a one part claim can be useful and taken into consideration. Invention comprises all features of the claim! 9 Form of a Claim: One Part / Two Part - Example One part claim: From: Int. Application Nr. PCT/IB2003/005958 1) A Method of producing a soya bean product, the method including the step of exposing soya beans to an acidic aqueous solution. 2) A method as claimed in Claim 1, in whichthe acidic aqueous solution has a ph of between about 2.0 and 5.5. 3) A method as claimed in Claim 1 or Claim 2, in which the soya beans are whole beans 4) A method as claimed in any one of the preceding claims which includes the prior step of dissolving an organic acid in water to produce an aqueous acidic solution. 5) A method as claimed in Claim 4 in which the organic acid is citric i acid. 10

Form of a Claim: One Part / Two Part - Handling Two part claim: Introductory part characterizing part Category, purpose, general - specific features Link: characterized in... or characterized by. The introductory features of the invention are generally supposed to be known to the applicant. (US: definitly state of the art; Europe: Closest st.o.a) the characterizing features form the body of the invention with the specific features to be protected, introduced by characterized in.(as far as known) Apparatus with features A, B, characterized by features C, D. If there is a document in the state of the art giving the clear base for the invention, then a two part claim is to be considered and useful. It should be applied whenever appropriate (EPO-practice). 11 Form of a Claim: One Part / Two Part - Example Two part claim: 1) A dining table having legs evenly distributed around the periphery of the table top, which legs do not protrude beyond said periphery, characterized in that the table has three legs. 2) A dining table according to Claim 1 characterized in that the legs are made of ply wood. / Invention comprises all and only the features of the claim! 12

Independent Claims - No substantial reference to any other claim/ independent solution of the underlying objective problem (unity!) - Often: ONLY ONE PER CATEGORY (product, process, use, apparatus/device - except if a) alternative independent solutions of the same (objective) problem are to be considered (e.g. several processes to obtain one and the same product or b) with interrelated products (plug and socket, receiver/transmitter). 13 Dependent Claims - Refer to one or more dependent and/or independent claim: Apparatus according to claim 1 / claim 1 n / one of the claims 1 - n further comprising characterized in that it further - give further limitations/specifications to the claims referred to; - show preferred embodiments fall back positions if claim 1 fails; - contains all the features of the claims referred to plus ist own features.! Check initial file covering! 14

Basic Types of Claims - Categories - Product (compound, material, fabric..) - Apparatus/device - Process (method for producing something, doing something..);! product obtained by the process is automatically protected with it! - Use (of a product to obtain a specific result; use claim is a special type of process claims 15 Interpretation of Claims - Rules for Practitioners - (Non-)limitations: - Apparatus for, apparatus suitable for.. (purpose): Not limiting (except purpose describes subjects constructive features fishing hook/coat hook). - Optional features, alternatives (especially, particularly): Not limiting the scope, neither in protection nor in search. - S-M comprising: open i.e. (a+b+others) S-M..consisting of: limiting i.e. (a+b only) 16

Interpretation of Claims Specialities - Process claim: Protection extends to the product directly obtained (Art. 64(2) EPC) - Use claim = process claim! - Product by process claim: only if no other definition possible! 17 Interpretation of Claims Specialities to obtain appropriate protection - 1st and 2nd medical use claim: Use of a known substance or composition for a new treatment substance X as pesticide - Use of substance X for producing a medicament fort he treatment of C ( Swiss type ) - Markush grouping (multiple references): X selected from the group consisting of a,b,c,d, e, f and g and any combinations thereof. 18

Final Highlighing in Claim Drafting - Be clear (objective facts instead of subjective judgement). - Be complete (covering all inventive features in a proper context). - Be supported (all parts of the claims must (should) be fully explained in the description. - Be -- literally, word-for-word -- covered by the initial disclosure. 19 Thank You? Questions? 20