공지된 구성요소를 치환하는 경우 발명의 진보성 판단에 관한 고찰
A study on the criteria for determining inventive step pursuant to substitution of known elements
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Determination of inventive step is the most important requirement for patentability. Korean Patent Law Article 29(2) describes "could easily have been made before the filing of a patent application by a person with ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains, the patent for such an invention may not be granted". The article is not complex, however, It is the most difficult to apply. Consequently, it is not possible to predict with certainty whether a given invention will meet the requirement. There are many issues on determining inventive step, such as the person skilled in the art, secondary consideration, hindsight. This paper reviews several cases related with substitution of known elements as well as the corresponding practices in the United States, EPO, and Japan, and looks for criteria determining inventive step when the known elements are substituted with others. Through out this process, this paper tries to find the way how to apply the criteria to the real cases.
Abstract
Determination of inventive step is the most important requirement for patentability. Korean Patent Law Article 29(2) describes "could easily have been made before the filing of a patent application by a person with ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains, the patent for such an invention may not be granted". The article is not complex, however, It is the most difficult to apply. Consequently, it is not possible to predict with certainty whether a given invention will meet the requirement. There are many issues on determining inventive step, such as the person skilled in the art, secondary consideration, hindsight. This paper reviews several cases related with substitution of known elements as well as the corresponding practices in the United States, EPO, and Japan, and looks for criteria determining inventive step when the known elements are substituted with others. Through out this process, this paper tries to find the way how to apply the criteria to the real cases.
참고문헌 (17)
- 조영선, "특허법 주해 I" (2010), 박영사
- 진보성 등에 관한 각국 운용 등의 조사연구보고, "특허청", 특허청, ~ (2008)
- 고품질 심사심판을 지향하는 진보성 판단기준에 관한 연구보고서, "특허청", 특허청, ~ (2009)
- 조문별 특허법해설, "특허청", 특허청, ~ (2007)
- 특허·실용신안 심사지침서, "특허청", 특허청, ~ (2009)
- 박성수, "한국 특허법상의 특허발명의 진보성 판단", LAW & TECHNOLOGY, 3(6) (2007), 서울대학교 기술과법센터
- 박성수, "특허청구범위 해석에 관한 소고", 사법논집, 39 (2004)
- 우라옥, "최근의 사례들에 비추어 본 한국 특허법상 진보성 판단의 방법 또는 기술", LAW & TECHNOLOGY, 4(3) (2008), 서울대학교 기술과법센터
- 조영선, "발명의 진보성 판단에 관한 연구", 사법논집, 37 (2004)
- 정재헌, "유럽특허청의 진보성 판단 실무" (2002), 지식재산 21
- 정차호, "발명의 진보성 판단에 있어서 사후고찰(hindsight) 감소방안" (2010), 지식재산 21
- 한동수, "발명의 진보성 판단기준", 특허소송연구, 4 (2008)
- 中山信弘, "特許法判例百選 3판" (2005), 박영사
- 竹田和彦, "특허의 지식 제6판" (2001)
- Donald S. Chisum, "英和對譯, 改訂第二版" (2000), 雄松堂出版
- "Examination Guidelines for Determining Obviousness Under 35 U.S.C. 103 in View of the Supreme Court Decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc", Federal Register, 72(195), pp.57526~57535 (2007)
- "Examination Guidelines & Training Materials in view of KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc" (2010)[URL]