1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On the Plaintiff’s application for utility model registration, the Korean Intellectual Property Office examiner, April 29, 2014, on the ground that the instant Claim No. 1 design pertains to a person with ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the relevant invention pertains (hereinafter “ordinary engineer”).

(2) On May 19, 2014, the Plaintiff rendered a decision of refusal on the ground that the nonobviousness could be denied because it could easily created by prior art (Evidence B). Accordingly, on the ground that the Plaintiff filed a petition for an appeal against the foregoing decision of refusal with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board tried on May 30, 2014, and rendered a decision on October 17, 2014, on the ground that the nonobviousness was not denied by the foregoing prior art, and that “the original decision is revoked and the instant case is remanded to the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board.” (ii) On the instant petition petition that was remanded to the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board, the Korean Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board notified the applicant of his/her opinion on November 19, 2014 on the ground that the nonobviousness could be easily created by the prior art 1 through 3.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff submitted a written opinion on November 24, 2014, but the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office rendered a decision to reject the instant petition petition on the grounds that the nonobviousness is denied by the prior petition 1 to 3 on January 26, 2015.

3) On February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the foregoing decision of refusal with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board. The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board deliberated on the said request with 2015 Won1093, and on May 31, 2016, the instant decision dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on the ground that the nonobviousness of the invention can be denied on the ground that the ordinary skilled person could easily derive the device of the instant Claim 1 through 3. B. The title of the invention of the instant Claim 1 (No. 5-1) invention: multi-functional dives with straws screen.