2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The grounds of the instant trial decision are as follows. 1) The Plaintiff’s name is “a device for processing the press” (hereinafter “instant patent application invention”).

On July 6, 2012, an examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office filed an application for a patent on July 24, 2013, notified the Plaintiff of his/her submission of his/her opinion that “the invention of this case is non-obviousness; claims 1 through 12 are denied; claims 7 through 12 are ineligible for a patent; and claims 7 through 12 are non-obviousness.” Accordingly, the Plaintiff amended the specification, etc. on December 24, 2013; however, on April 25, 2014, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rejected the Plaintiff’s application for a trial on the ground that “the invention of this case is non-obviousness by the prior invention 1 through 5, 9, 11, and 12 below; and the identification number [05] in the specification of the application was non-obviousness; on the ground that the Plaintiff’s refusal to submit his/her opinion to the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board on August 25, 2014.”

B. The Plaintiff’s title of the invention claimed in the instant application (Evidence 1) 1: The filing date/priority date/application number: July 6, 2012; 30./30./ 10-2012-074122 of the invention described in the summary of the invention described in the Plaintiff’s patent application invention described in subparagraph 1: the Plaintiff’s patent application invention described in the summary of the No. 4 invention described in the No. 10-207412, such as a glass plate used in the manufacture of semiconductor elements or a glass plate used in the manufacture of semiconductor elements.