207Heo12916 Decision of Refusal (Special Cases)

Foreign Company

Patent Attorney Kim Sung-sung and Kim Jin-jin, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Patent Attorney Doo-son

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Litigation Performers Shoyops

October 15, 2008

December 17, 2008

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on October 29, 2007 on the case No. 2007 Won4719 is revoked.

1. Details of the trial decision;

On June 5, 2006, the plaintiff filed the invention of this case (name: method and number of application of professional siren: No. 2006 - No. 2006 - 701546, the date of priority claim: December 5, 1997; hereinafter the same shall apply in attached Form 1)

Although B filed an application with the Korean Intellectual Property Office, the decision of rejection was received, and on May 3, 2007, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal filed an appeal against the decision of rejection with the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal.

After the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board examined the above case as 207 won 4719, it rendered a trial ruling dismissing the above case on October 29, 2007 on the ground that the patent application claim No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the "claim No. 1") of the invention in the patent application No. 4 prior to the patent application of the invention in the patent application of this case cannot be patented due to the lack of inventive step by the comparable inventions described in the attached Form No. 4, publicly notified prior to the patent application of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Nos. 1, 2 (including the relevant number), 1, 2

2. Issues;

The key issue of this case is whether the nonobviousness of the Claim 1 invention is denied by the cited inventions.

3. Judgment on the issue

[The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion] Claim 1 invention falls under the selective invention of comparable inventions, but Si/Al original costs are limited to the disclosed invention, thereby achieving a remarkable effect of improving the number and level of professional sirens and enhancing the stability of sales in the leaked. In addition, the improvement of the level of net sirens constitutes a dual effect that is not perceived in the comparable invention. Accordingly, paragraph 1 invention is non-obviousness without examining the critical significance of the numerical limitation scope of Si/Al.

[Judgment]

A. Criteria for determining patent requirements for selective inventions limiting the numerical value

The so-called selective invention whose constituent elements are written in the preceding or publicly known invention as a superior concept and all or part of the subordinate concepts included in the above upper concept has not commenced specifically the subordinate concepts comprising the selective invention, Secondly, all subordinate concepts included in the selective invention are entitled to a patent only if the effects and quality of the preceding invention are different from those of the preceding invention or if there is no qualitative difference, or if there is a remarkable difference in quantity. In this case, the detailed description of the selective invention is sufficient to clearly state the above effects compared to the preceding invention, and it is not necessary to state the comparative experiment material capable of specifically verifying its effects. If the effect is doubtful, it is only necessary for the applicant to claim and prove its effects in detail by the method of submitting the detailed comparative experiment material after the filing date (see Supreme Court Decision 200Hu2740, Apr. 25, 2003). Meanwhile, if an invention for which the patent application was filed has a significant difference in the numerical value of the preceding invention, it shall not be limited to an ordinary or non-obviousness element of the invention.

Therefore, the patent application invention with only the numerical scope included in the elements of elements limited to the numerical scope of the prior invention publicly notified as the numerical scope does not begin specifically for the prior invention, and its numerical scope does not begin specifically for the prior invention, as long as there are other elements to recognize the inventive step of the prior invention, and the numerical limitation is not merely supplementary matters.

A patent may be granted only when there is a qualitative difference or quantitative difference between the outside and the outside.

B. The purpose of the invention is to provide high-water rate and high-speed professional sirens manufacturing methods from raw materials of lefine hydrocarbons in comparison with the elements of Claim 1 invention (1) invention and Claim 1 invention in comparison with the elements of Claim 1 invention. In its composition, Claim 1 invention in comparison with the following table: (a) invention in paragraph 1 invention is manufactured by a decision processing using organic liquor by manufacturing promotion, and the condition that no steam treatment or stimulium treatment is conducted is limited additionally.

However, the comparisond Invention 1 states the method of manufacturing the promotions using the organic solvent (No. 1, No. 2, No. 21 - No. 33) and takes into account the fact that the promotions created by the decision-making reaction using the organic solvent in the specification of the patent application invention of this case and being used for the commercial marketing of 300 persons for the production method of the promotions, it cannot be deemed that there is a special technical significance in the technical composition that the decision-making method using the organic solvent in relation to the production method, and that the steam treatment or alkinium treatment is not carried out, and only the promotions with high Si/A l original costs are used (this point is not in dispute between the parties).

Therefore, in order to recognize the patentability of a claim 1 invention, it is necessary to recognize the qualitative difference or quantitative difference in the numerical range for Si/Ll original costs listed in the claim 1 invention compared to the out thereof, or to recognize a significant difference in the numerical effect (the plaintiff asserts that in a case where a qualitative effect takes place compared with the comparable invention due to the numerical limitation of the patent application invention, the critical significance is unnecessary, but the above assertion is not accepted on the ground that there is no ground to regard it as the occurrence of a qualitative effect.)

(2) The effects of numerical definition

The Plaintiff asserts that there is a significant effect on the improvement of the ratio and net level of propy and the stability of the promotion by determining the numerical value of propyh's Si/L original cost. As such, the Plaintiff is considered to have a significant effect on the increase of the promotion. As such, whether (A) the improvement of the number of propyh's propy is significant.

In the art of the operation of comparable inventions, the rate of 36 l2O3 combined with 50 square meters is 50 square meters, so that the mixture of 50 square meters is supplied with air pressure (one voltage) and 50 cc/h spatial speed, the conversion rate of 20 cc/h is reduced within 12 hours at the early stage of the process, and the conversion rate of 10 to 6 cc/h is changed again, and the conversion rate of 1 to 6 cc. : 1 to 6 cc. , the conversion rate of 6 cc. - the total quantity of 1 to 6 cc. - the conversion rate of 6 cc. 1 to 6 cc. - the conversion rate of 1 to 6 cc. - the conversion rate of 6 cc. 1 to 6 cc. , the conversion rate of 60 cc. 1 to 6 cc. 1 to 26 cc.

However, the comparable invention contains approximately 50% of the total raw materials supplied (n - 2 mixed with 10% of the total raw materials supplied; 2- The combination with 30% of the total raw materials used for the supply of 50% of the total raw materials used for the use of n-Tin, and the combination with 50% of the total raw materials used for the use of n-Tin. In general, 2- The conversion rate of 50 square meters is lower; 10% of the total raw materials supplied for the use of 10% of the total raw materials supplied for the use of 30% of the total raw materials, and 10% of the total raw materials used for the use of 10% of the number used for the use of 10% of the number used for the use of 30% of the total raw materials, and 4% of the number used for the use of 1-6% of the No. 1273 of the No.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserts that the 16 invention of this case used promotions without any steam treatment or sapum aluminium treatment, and that it cannot be compared with each other, since it used promotions with steam treatment and sapum aluminium treatment. However, the promotions used in 8 for executing the invention of this case claimed that Si/ Al used in Si/L is a steam treatment and steam treatment with 120 source cost, and it is difficult to conclude that Si/L source cost is 180 source cost, and that it is not reasonable to conclude that the 80 source cost of Si/L performed the above treatment and shotum treatment, compared with the 8th unit cost of the invention of this case, it is not reasonable to conclude that the 80 source cost of this case did not perform the sapum treatment and shotum treatment. In light of the fact that it is not reasonable to conclude that the shotum treatment and shotum treatment had the effect of the shotum treatment compared with that of the shotum.

(B) Whether the improvement of the net level of professional sirens is remarkable

The plaintiff asserts that, according to Si/Al original cost of the invention of this case, if the invention of this case is 300, the net intention of propy is good if the propy is followed by the promotion of numerical range such as Si/Al's original cost, 90% from 112 to 92% from 162 to 93.5, while comparison 1% from 5 to 84% from 97 hours after reaction, and 92% from 97 hours from 92% from 1 invention of this case.

However, the above comparison does not compare the current level after the same reaction time. However, in light of the table listed in the attached Table 3, only when the original cost of Si/L used promotions with 120 persons and the five hours of the reaction time, the net level of proton shows 84.3%, and there is a better professional siren net level than the promotion of 16% during the other original cost or the reaction time. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the net level of proton by paragraph 1 invention is better than that of the comparable invention. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s above assertion cannot be accepted. (c) Whether there is a significant increase in the stability of promotion.

The plaintiff asserts that the stability of the promotion under paragraph (1) of this case is outstanding on the ground that following 97 hours after the reaction, Si/L cost of the invention in this case was reduced by 96 hours after the reaction, according to the Ci/L cost of the first invention in this case, after 97 hours after the reaction, the conversion rate is reduced after 96 hours after the reaction, on the ground that Ci/L cost of the first invention in this case is reduced by 300.

Comparing the table 14 as indicated in the table 12a, as indicated in the attached Table 2. A, the promotions in the event that steam treatment is performed only with the original cost of at least 180 persons indicated in the table 12a as indicated in the attached Table 2.A, show a higher rate and stability than 16 of the promotion of the invention in paragraph 1. According to the Firure 1 of comparable Invention 1, the conversion rate of up to 120 hours is stable, and the conversion rate of up to 120 hours decreases, but even in that case, the conversion rate of up to 62% is 30%, and it is difficult to view that there is no obvious difference between the implementation rate of the invention in light of the overall content of the invention in question and the overall content of the invention in question, and thus, it is difficult to view that the utilization rate of the invention in question differs from 16% prior to and after the implementation rate of the invention in question, compared to the total content of the invention in question.

4. Conclusion

Thus, the invention of this case cannot be patented as a whole, and the trial decision of this case is legitimate as it concludes with this conclusion. Thus, the plaintiff's claim seeking revocation is unfair and dismissed.

The presiding judge Kim Jong-soo

Judges Oh Jin-jin

Judges Green Min-seop

Site of separate sheet

1. Claims for patent of the invention in the instant case (amended on January 8, 2007)

1. Claim 1. The decision-making process by which organic liquor is used, and any steam treatment or product is manufactured; or

Si/L’s original cost is 300 to 1000 MFI sheet, each of which is not a aluminium process

J. at the point of contact between 500 to 600 C and 0.1 to 2 fin fin fin fin f.o.

Key includes steps, and LUV 10 to 30h, by passing the above supply material on the promotional sheet. Hain

30 to 50% on the basis of the lefin content of supply raw materials

from raw materials supplied after lefin containing at least one kind of lefin, which is a person of c4 or more.

The method of manufacturing protons by year.

Claim 2 through 14: Deletion or omission of description

2. A table indicating the results of an experiment related to the license of the invention under paragraph (1);

(a) 【Si/ Al = 180, steam treatment and extraction treatment l.m. 8 (Si/ Al. 180, steam treatment and extraction)

Tin LASV (Rect ht) S45 30

n-Departments

Pakistan P1 02 - Pss 05 43 56 2 6 48 January 4, 511

Other and US 69

TOS (h) 45.11

(b) 【Ban 12b】 Comparison 1 (Si/ Al = 120, Mari-blade not modified)

Tin LRSV (+h c1) 549 30

TOS (h) 5 197 169

n- The whole hall of Den on 85.20 September 20, 1990 5.90

- October 0, 00 00 October 41, 51 21 October 17, 100

on June 70, 104 514 June 70, 104 46 06

m04 APS. nPS + cPs 0 on 00 70 - 76 9 196 1 on 22 December 2, 201 50 50 43

c6 105 + 105 + -cos 10 October 80 20 43 50 June 69 116 16 298 99

on 00 0 100 100 100 100 100

- - 00,55.00 46.01 47 S2.24

Other and butane 0.80 6 30 June 30, 302 99

on 00 0 100 100 100 100 100

c. (Attachment 12C) - Comparison 2 (Si/L = 120, steam treatment chlorates)

T HSV in (h C) 29 549.6

TOS (h) 16 72

n- Conversion rate of Denmark 73.10 70.10

on October 10, 200 00 October 20, 200

aP30 0. 0 0 0 0 10 0 20 73 40 10 10 71 30

on March 30, 1998 89 33 March 16, 200 : IP4 0 30 40 40 17 89 33 16 27 14

C c 104 2 53 40 20 10 14 11 10 15 99 75 on October 15, 199

pin PIP nP4no4 - P supply 44.20 50 P. 49 49 49 40 46 40 40 46 40 45 44 1197 10 197 44 .15 .15

105 iP5 + nP5 nostcos + CPS 0 October 50, 500 on July 50, 518 80 on July 80, 500.

C6 + 0.30 2.43 4.52

Total number of 100 00 100 100 100 100

Finine 01 - 06. 00 - 52 December 38, 51 26 22

Other and unclaimed water 0.30 2.43 4.52

Joint 100 00 100 100 100 100

27. (214) - 210 16 (Si/L = 300, 3771 E 27201 E)

T HSV Inc (h·C) 560 23

TOS (h) 40 122 162

Ma. 88 Outflows Me. Me. Ma

n- 20 & (%) 82.01 79 74 July 54, 74

ت P1 0. 01 0. 31 0. 25 0. 20

ت 0. 00 00 0. 41 0. 33 0. 27

ي 0. 22 2. 02 1. 54 1. 23

ت

On May 15, 104 41 556 - May 15, 104 - June 16, 196 - 76 - June 16, 80 - 40 - June 16, 51

Nos. 52 November 72, 159 9 10 46 11 November 72

ت iPS nPS 0 0. . 07 00 0 0. . 40 21 0. 34 0. 31

CPS 105 October 00 00 00 009 October 41, 301 October 31, 303 65 01 October 35, 301

Nos. 0. 00 1. 73 89 2. 06

D5 October 0, 00 00 00 October 20, 20 14 October 14, 200 0 20 13

ت iP6 0. 00 0. 04 0. 03 0. 02

nP6 CPG 0.00 00 October 0, 06 43 0 October 0, 05 05 34 05

On October 106, 106 0, 001 October 73, 101, 000,000:

D6 C06 0 October 00, 00 00 October 00, 000 06 October 06 000 06 October 06 000 06 00

ت A6 iP7 0 0. . 00 00 0 0. . 61 07 0 0. . 06 59 0 0 OOOOO. . 05 57

nP7 0 OOOO, 00 October 00, 00 00 0.00

No 107 No 0. 00 00 00 October 0, 100 - October 20, 200 - October 2008 - October 19, 2007

D7 CO7 0.00 0 October 33, 000 October 23, 200 0 October 19, 200

ت 1 PB 0. 00 1 0. . 06 09 0. 09 0 0. . 09 77

CPB on October 0, 108 00 00 October 00, 000 on October 03, 000 001 October 01, 010

ا A8 noe COS 0 0 0. .. 00 00 00 0 0 1. .. 00 00 03 0 0 0. .. 00 00 95 0 0 0. .. 00 00 83

on October 00, 100 100 October 100, 100

Rinin (0 P) 45 April 10, 1086 49 July 70, 497 47 July 70, 478 60 60 68 47 50 59

DNA (D) 0.04 October 23, 200 0.24

8. (A) 0. 0 2. 70 2. 49 2. 17

on 00 0 100 100 100 100 100

3. The level of net paintings according to Si/L original cost listed in the specification of the pending invention in the instant application.

* Proton net calculating formula *

A person shall be appointed.

[AttachmentD] / [The number of professional sirens (03)] / [The ratio of the professional board (P3) + the number of professional sirens (03)]] x 100

4. Cited inventions;

A. Cited Invention 1 (Evidence B No. 1; 109, 060, 23 May 1984, 1984)

(1) The summary of the technology

Consumed Invention C4- C10 Slin’s c10 Slin’s clive transition reaction

as to the method of obtaining propye, not less than 350 SiO2/ Al2O3 Man2O3

The reaction temperature is 400~600C, reaction pressure is 1, using ZSM5, knife, etc.

The spatial speed of raw materials for supply shall be between voltages and 7.5, and the spatial speed of raw materials shall be from 5 to 200 km/h.

The process shall be stated, and the conversion rate shall be reduced in the early stage (within 12 hours) of the work (within 36 hours).

The trend of increase is changed again, and the reaction itself of lefin conversion itself promotes and maintains the activation of the promotion.

state that it is stated that it will be.

The following drawings are in a city in which the conversion rate of lein by hour (on the first day thereof) is a city, and Do;

in terms of + in terms of Madex (the third city above) the choice of proton is also shown.

c. paid;

(2) Drawings

FIGURE1

X = =

+ o = Sel.

- Sel. Tow

- Sel. Toliquis 2C.

. Hours on December 12, 200 0. 36 October 36, 200 . 60 October 40, 120 . 96 October 4, 109 . 0 on October 120, 1209

B. Added Invention 2 (Nos. 2, 109, 059, 23 May 1984, 1984)

Consumed Invention 2: Conversion of hydrocarbons containing lelefin into professional sirens

The process is provided, and the promotional is the siO2/ Al2O3 Mala 300

or less than it, ZSM5 and ZSM11 are or improve, for example, ZSM5 and ZSM11

use, and the spatial speed shall be at least 50 km/h, and temperature shall be 400

be stated as SiO2 / Al2O3 debris in Section 8, for example, 71 and 72.

204.In the case of increase to 204, compared to the case of 5 mallebb 28 male

The effect has been stated.

-Finally -