logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2015.01.15 2014허6087
등록무효(특)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Name of the instant patent invention 1: D2) filing date/registration date/registration number: E/F/ C3: Claim(s) and drawings: Attached Table 1.

(b) The name of the comparable invention 1 (B) comparable invention 1 (A) : A short-hemetet and method of manufacturing thereof b) / Publication published: On October 29, 2010 / The registered Patent Gazette No. 90157 (2) No. 90157 (a) of the registered Patent Gazette 2): Publication published on the publication/public notice of the soup / Publication: July 27, 1992 / Publication of the publication of the Utility Model Gazette No. 1992-5154

C. On April 29, 2013, the Defendant asserted that “The detailed description of the patented invention of this case is not clearly and in detail so that a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the invention pertains (hereinafter “ordinary technician”) can easily practice the patented invention of this case,” and that the invention of this case is not supported by the detailed description of the invention, and that the invention of this case is not clearly and concisely described, and that the patent registration invalidation trial (2) is requested on July 25, 2014 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the ground that “the patented invention of this case does not contain detailed description of the invention to the extent that the ordinary technician can easily practice the patented invention of this case, so it violates the requirements of Article 42(3) of the Patent Act as stated in Article 42(1) through (7) of the Patent Act, and thus, it violates the requirements of the Defendant’s trial decision citing that the invention of this case violates Article 42(4)2 of the Patent Act.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claims by the parties and the issues of the instant case

A. The Plaintiff is easy to make a detailed description of the patented invention of this case, and a person with ordinary skills to make the inventions of paragraphs 4 through 7 of this case.

arrow