组合物专利封闭式权利要求保护范围的分析-analysis of the protection scope of closed claims of composition patents.docxVIP

1 1 2 2 Abstract With the increase of invention patents in the medical and chemical fields, there have been an increasing number of relevant patent infringements in the recent years. And a closed claim has become common in the invention patent of medical and chemical fields. A closed claim belongs to a special patent right and it is in correspondence to the open claim. And a closed claim should use the transition phrase of “consisting of ...”, and this shall normally be interpreted as the statement that the composition does not include any component other than those that have been set forth in the claim. According to the provisions of the Guidelines for Patent Examination (hereinafter referred to Guidelines), the protection scope of a closed claim is limited to the components that have been set forth in the claim. However, there is still considerable dispute over the protection scope of a composition closed claim in the juridical practice. And there are no provisions about a closed claim in the Patent Law and its regulations for the implementation, and the Supreme Court has not elaborated the protection scope of a closed claim in its relevant judicial interpretation. Therefore, courts can solely refer to the provisions of the Guidelines for judicial interpretation in the juridical practice, which leads to different judicial interpretations about the protection scope of the same closed claim in different courts and even opposite verdicts about the same closed claim. This undermines the judicial authority. Therefore, it is of great significance to carry out a study on the protection scope of a closed claim in composition patent. The dissertation can be divided into five chapters. Chapter one is the case review. The chapter presents a series of patent infringement cases so as to prove the importance of this study. Chapter two is the introduction about the case focus and the relevant problems. The scope of patent protection and the verdicts of relevant patent infringeme