论“专利复审委依职权审查并以新理由维驳”制度

发布时间：2018-05-04 11:37

本文选题：专利复审 + 准司法　；参考：《清华大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：在我国,处理复审请求是专利复审委员会的职能之一。在专利申请和授权程序中,申请人如果对初步审查或实质审查后驳回申请的决定不服,可以向专利复审委员会请求复审。在现有制度下,考虑到公众的期待利益,复审委原则上在驳回决定所依据的理由和证据范围内进行审查。但是,《专利审查指南》(2010修订)规定了例外情形,即复审委在两种特定的情况下可以进行“依职权审查”,并且经审查认定后,可以依据该理由及其证据(“新理由”)做出维持驳回的审查决定。值得注意的是,对于这两种特定的情形,审查指南并未做出进一步明确的规定,从而带来了一系列问题,特别是,由于没有界定相关的概念的标准,复审委在适用这两种情形时可以依照自己的标准和逻辑对相关概念进行界定,于是,是否适用例外情形取决于复审委的主观判断,这无疑对申请人十分不利。解决这一问题,首先,需考察这一制度的合理性和正确性,即专利复审委本质上是否可以依职权审查并以新理由驳回。其次,如果此制度有一定合理性,则需探讨相关概念应如何界定的问题;如果此制度不合理,则需考虑对其进行改良或改革。本文研究的目的,即在于此。具体而言,本文首先介绍了研究的背景和范围。然后,本文从两个典型案例出发,通过实例,引出本文所针对的问题。接下来,本文从多个角度分析了专利复审程序的性质,并认为“准司法说”具有合理性。随后,本文分别考察了目前与“依职权审查”和“新理由驳回”相关的规定,并认为前者有一定积极意义,而后者则有改良或改革的必要。最后,本文围绕复审程序的“准司法”性质,提出了改良复审程序的路径;通过考察美国专利复审程序的实践,认为美国模式更有合理性且对我国有借鉴价值,并由此提出了改革复审程序的建议。
[Abstract]:In our country, processing the request for review is one of the functions of the Patent Review Board. In patent applications and licensing procedures, the applicant may apply to the Patent Review Board for review if he is not satisfied with the decision to reject the application after a preliminary or substantive examination. Under the existing system, taking into account the expected public interest, the Board reviews in principle the grounds and evidence on which the decision is dismissed. However, the Patent Review Guide (revised in 2010) provides for an exception in which the RRC may conduct an "ex officio review" in two specific circumstances and, after the review has been determined, The decision to confirm the rejection may be made on the basis of that ground and its evidence ("new grounds"). It is worth noting that the review guide does not provide further clarity in these two specific cases, which raises a number of problems, in particular the absence of criteria for defining relevant concepts, The RRC can define the relevant concepts according to its own criteria and logic when applying these two cases. Therefore, the applicability of the exception depends on the RRC's subjective judgment, which is undoubtedly very disadvantageous to the applicant. To solve this problem, first of all, it is necessary to examine the rationality and correctness of this system, that is, whether the Patent Review Board can in essence be examined ex officio and dismissed on new grounds. Secondly, if the system is reasonable, it is necessary to discuss how to define the relevant concepts; if the system is unreasonable, it should be improved or reformed. This is the purpose of this study. Specifically, this paper first introduces the background and scope of the study. Then, this article from two typical cases, through the example, leads to the question which this article aims at. Then, this paper analyzes the nature of patent review procedure from several angles, and thinks that "quasi-judicial theory" is reasonable. Then, this paper examines the current provisions related to "ex officio review" and "New reason rejection", and thinks that the former has certain positive significance, while the latter has the necessity of improvement or reform. Finally, this paper puts forward the way to improve the review procedure around the "quasi-judicial" nature of the review procedure, and considers that the American model is more reasonable and valuable for our country by examining the practice of the patent review procedure in the United States. It also puts forward the suggestion of reforming the review procedure.
【学位授予单位】：清华大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.42

【相似文献】