beta
Text
1. The Intellectual Property Tribunal shall revoke a trial decision in connection with a case No. 2015 won 4455, Mar. 21, 2017;
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Following 1 B. On January 29, 2015, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office who examined the invention in the instant case described in paragraph (1) B. On January 29, 2015, he/she notified the Plaintiff of the submission of the opinion indicating the lack of inventive step as of January 10, 2014 (Evidence No. 2) and the Plaintiff’s submission of the opinion indicating the lack of inventive step as of July 29, 2015 (Evidence No. 4). However, the Plaintiff still omitted the amendment of the description No. 35 of the Korean Intellectual Property Office’s invention as of July 20, 2014, because the invention described in subparagraph 1 through 14 (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary engineer”) can be easily described in combination with the preceding invention 1 or the preceding invention 1 and 2, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office notified the Plaintiff of the submission of the opinion indicating the lack of inventive step as of July 29, 2014 (Evidence No. 365). 1).
(A) On July 30, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a petition for a trial on an appeal for rejection with the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (2015 Won445) seeking the revocation of the foregoing decision of refusal, and subsequently amended the specification, etc. on August 28, 2015 (Evidence A9, Evidence B No. 1) but the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office at the pre-examination stage (Evidence A) and at the pre-examination stage, the examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office stated the Claim No. 1, 3, or 14 amended on September 22, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant Claim No. 1”).
(4) The Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal maintained the original decision that the inventive step is denied by the preceding invention. (3) On March 21, 2017, the inventive step of the instant Claim 1 is denied by the preceding invention 1.