发明专利“非显而易见性”判断标准案例研究

发布时间：2018-10-22 16:11

【摘要】：在发明专利创造性的判断过程中,“非显而易见性”的判断是创造性判断的核心,因其较强的主观性,因此也成为了发明专利创造性判断过程中的难点。我国对于非显而易见性的判断采用的是“三步法”判断标准,这与美国的TSM检测法异曲同工。当TSM检测法被2007年美国KSR案件修改后,我国的专利“非显而易见性”判断标准也应当有所调整,向更加客观和准确的方向发展。因此KSR案件的审判结果以及KSR案件后美国对于发明专利的判例对我国的审判标准都有重要的启发和学习意义。本文通过对我国具体案例的分析,探讨了对于发明专利“非显而易见性”的判断标准的改进方法。本文主要分为三章,第一章介绍了发明专利中“非显而易见性”的起源和发展。“非显而易见性”的概念并不是伴随着专利制度同时出现,而是在专利制度发展过程中逐步产生。此章主要论述了“非显而易见性”的背景,和对于其发展具有里程碑意义的国外案例。本文第二章是对于我国关于发明专利的“非显而易见性”判断的案例分析。通过对具体案例的分析和比较,发现我国在审判实务中存在的问题和特点。主要涉及到对于技术手段,技术效果,以及关于“三步法”适用过程中的一些想法和建议,关于对比文献在发明专利“非显而易见性”判断过程中存在的局限性提出看法。本文第三章是对发明专利“非显而易见性”判断标准改进的一些探讨。笔者提出应当在发明专利“非显而易见性”判断标准中增加技术手段和技术效果的可预测性方法,在“三步法”的运用过程中应当更加灵活,不应过分局限于现有文献的文字记述,对于所属领域的普通技术人员的创造性水平可以适当调整,对于不同的技术领域灵活的区别判断。
[Abstract]:In the process of judging the creativity of invention patent, the judgment of "non-obvious" is the core of the creative judgment, because of its strong subjectivity, it also becomes the difficulty in the process of creative judgment of invention patent. The standard of "three step method" is adopted in our country to judge non-obviousness, which is the same as the TSM detection method in the United States. When the TSM detection method was revised by the KSR case in the United States in 2007, the judgment standard of "non-obviousness" of patent in our country should also be adjusted to a more objective and accurate direction. Therefore, the trial result of KSR case and the case of invention patent in America after KSR case have important enlightening and learning significance to the trial standard of our country. Based on the analysis of specific cases in China, this paper discusses the improvement of the judgment standard of "non-obviousness" for invention patents. This paper is divided into three chapters. The first chapter introduces the origin and development of non-obviousness in invention patent. The concept of "non-obviousness" does not appear at the same time with the patent system, but comes into being in the process of the development of the patent system. This chapter mainly discusses the background of "non-obviousness" and foreign cases which have milestone significance for its development. The second chapter is a case study of the "non-obvious" judgment of invention patents in China. Through the analysis and comparison of specific cases, we find the problems and characteristics in trial practice in our country. This paper mainly deals with the technical means, technical effects, some ideas and suggestions on the application of the "three-step method", and puts forward some opinions on the limitations of the comparative literature in judging the "non-obviousness" of invention patents. The third chapter discusses the improvement of the judgment standard of non-obviousness of invention patent. The author suggests that the predictive method of technical means and technical effect should be added to the judgment standard of "non-obviousness" of invention patent, and that the application of "three-step method" should be more flexible. It should not be too limited to the written description of the existing literature. The creative level of the ordinary technical personnel in their field can be adjusted appropriately and the difference between different technical fields can be judged flexibly.
【学位授予单位】：上海交通大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.42;D920.5

【相似文献】