Guideline2013amdt.docVIP

Guideline 2013 amdt Guideline 2013 amdt Proposed Comments Translation of Proposed Comments Part I, Chapter II. Part I, Chapter II. 11. 根据专利法第二十二条第二款的审查 初步审查中，审查员对于实用新型专利申请是否明显不具备新颖性进行审查。审查员可以根据其获得的有关现有技术或抵触申请的信息审查实用新型专利申请是否明显不具备新颖性。 实用新型可能涉及非正常申请的，例如明显抄袭现有技术或者属于内容明显实质相同的专利申请重复提交，审查员应当根据检索获得的对比文件或者其他途径获得的信息审查实用新型专利申请是否明显不具备新颖性。 有关新颖性的审查参照本指南第二部分第三章的规定。 11. Examination in Accordance with Article 22.2 In the preliminary examination, the examiner generally does not determine on search examines whether a utility model patent application is obviously lack of novelty, but and may determine such on the information obtained of related prior art or conflicting applications not through search. However, Where an abnormal applications for utility model is involved, such as an application obviously plagiarizing prior art or repeated submission of an application with substantially identical content, the examiner shall judge examine whether the utility model is obviously lack of novelty based on the reference document obtained from search or through other approaches. With regard to the examination on novelty, the provisions of Chapter 3 of Part II of these Guidelines shall apply. The AIPLA supports the examination of utility model applications for lack of novelty. A substantial number of Chinese utility models have been filed in recent years and the assertion and/or enforcement of low-quality utility model applications may act as a drag on innovation. The AIPLA respectfully submits that effective examination practices, including those proposed by the amendment, may reduce the burden of these low-quality utility models. 美国知识产权法协会支持对实用新型专利申请是否不具备新颖性进行审查。近年来有相当数量的中国实用新型专利提出申请，而低质量之实用新型申请案的权利主张及/或法律执行有可能成为创新的阻力。美国知识产权法协会诚恳的表达: 有效率的审查实务，包括此修正草案所提出的，将可以减少此类低质量实用新型专利所产生的负荷。 13. 根据专利法第九条的审查 专利法第九条第一款规定，同样的发明创造只能授予一项专利权。专利法第九条第二款规定，两个以上的申请人分别就同样的发明创造申请专利的，专利权授予最先申请的人。 初步审查中，审查员可以根据其获得的同样的发明创造的专利申请，对实用新型专利申请是否符合专利法第九条的规定进行审查。 对同样的发明创造的处理，参照本指南第二部分第三章第6节的规定。 13. Examination in Acc