무효사유로서의 특허청구범위의 한정성, 우선권출원과의 불일치 및 파라미터발명의 요건

Definiteness of Claims, Discrepancy between Application and Priority Documents, and Requirements for Parameter Invention

The patent invalidation proceeding No. 2003 Dang 251 by the Korean Patent Trial Board (PTB) deals with non-obviousness of the invention, definiteness of claims, discrepancy between the filed application and priority documents, requirements for method claims, and requirements for parameter invention. In the decision of the case, PTB did not discover sufficiently the level of the technology of the present invention for determining non-obviousness thereof. In regard to the method claims of the subject invention, PTB did not understand what the invention is, and how the method claims should the drafted. Further, even though there exists discrepancy between the filed application and priority documents, PTB decided that the patented claims are not affected by the priority documents. Worst of all, PTB did not discuss about the requirements for parameter invention, because PTB decided that, as the present invention was not a chemical invention, therefore it was not necessary to discuss whether or not the subject claims are parameter inventions.