기본 콘텐츠로 건너뛰기

A precedent about the inventiveness of the patent


The Supreme Court's Precedent has been published which states that the inventiveness of the patent already registered should not be judged in the trial for confirmation of the scope of right to define an application range of patent right.

On March 20th, 2014, the supreme court decision confirmed the original trial that decided against a demandant with respect to the confirmation suit of patent right scope, in which company “A” specialized in manufacturing a special equipment vehicle (SEV) filed a suit revoking the decision of the Intellectual Property Tribunal (IPT) that determined its designing of feed transportation vehicle is similar with Kim’s registration utility model.

With respect to the claim raised by company “A”, in which “Kim’s utility model is considered as such patent that should be invalid due to the lack of the inventiveness, thus the scope of patent right as itself is not recognized”, the justice department decided as follows: “once a patent is registered, it cannot be judged premised on the invalidity in other processes, unless the invalidity trial is processed”.

Also, it was specified that “the trial for confirmation of the scope of right is such a process as to confirm whether the confirmation subject invention belongs to a scope where the effects of patent right extends” and accordingly, “judging premised on the invalidity of patent as itself at this process, is beyond the object of the system thus, the function of the patent nullity trial may be weakened.

In January 2012, Kim filed the trial for confirmation of the scope of right while asserting the company “A”’s designing of feed return carrier for use of the feed transporting vehicle corresponds to the scope of his utility model registered in 2004.

As the Intellectual Property Tribunal (IPT) decides in a way to cite Kim’s assertion, the company “A” filed a law suit against Kim.

The company “A” argued that “any person skilled in the art can easily devise Kim’s utility model” and that “the patent should be invalid due to the lack of the inventiveness, thus the scope of right as itself is not recognized”.

The patent court rejected the argument raised by company “A”, indicating that “even if there is no inventiveness at the trial for confirmation of the scope of right, the scope of right thereof cannot be denied”.

Therefore, Kim’s utility model was recognized and they judged that company “A”, which manufactures and delivers the feed transporting vehicle having similar structure and principle therewith, has violated the patent right scope of Kim’s.

The Supreme Court noted in connection with the subject judgment, that “the manner has been clarified in which the inventiveness cannot be examined considering the object and gist of the trial system for confirmation of the scope of right” and that “there is a certain significance upon which the precedent has been unified where the positive and negative coexisted.

댓글

댓글 쓰기

이 블로그의 인기 게시물

3. Disputable Agenda on Precedent Case

Claim 5 To form a metal panel in which a filing member is to be filled between a front plate and a rear plate which are made of a colored steel sheet, a method of forming a continuous metal panel comprising: continuously forming said front plate and rear plate having a certain width, in a lengthwise direction; forming caulking grooves having a narrow width to be in equal intervals in a lengthwise direction to said front plate; forming a connection groove portion and a connection projection portion respectively by bending upper and bottom portions of said front and rear plates; installing a cover so that said caulking grooves may be sealed with an outside; stiffening in a manner to fill a filing member between said front and rear plates; and loading said panel by cutting into a necessary length for use Claim 6 The continuous metal panel as claimed in claim 5, produced by use of an insulator in which a filing member is selected from a polyurethane foam (PU), a glass wool bo

Korean Patent and Trademark Applications Increased in 2012 despite Economic Crisis

- Application for patents and trademarks increased by 8% and 7%, respectively - Despite uncertain global economic conditions and financial crises throughout last year, Korean applications for intellectual property rights (IPRs) such as patents and trademarks increased last year, according to recent preliminary statistics. The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO, Commissioner Ho-won Kim) gathered preliminary statistics on IPR applications from 2012 and found that the total number of applications for patents, trademarks, and industrial designs filed in 2012 increased by about 8% to 400,815 from 371,116 in 2011. Although the uncertainty of the global economy is growing, companies remain committed to dominating new technologies and brands through future-oriented R&D investment, leading to an increase in Korean patent and trademark applications over the past year. By type, applications for patents increased year-on-year by 7.6% to 192,575, utility models by 5.2% to 12,467,