Editor's note: The Patent Examination Guide stipulates that for a utility model, one or two existing technologies can be cited to evaluate its creativity in general, and for a utility model patent formed by "simple superposition" of existing technologies, multiple existing technologies can be cited to evaluate its creativity according to the situation. Experts remind that the most fundamental thing to judge whether technical features are simply superimposed is to consider whether there is any correlation between technical features and whether there is mutual support in function.
Original title: How to judge the simple superposition of technical features in the patent for utility model
A brief preface
When judging whether the patent for utility model is obvious to the technicians in this field, we should consider this patent and the technical scheme in the prior art as a whole based on the knowledge and ability of the technicians in this field. In other words, it is necessary to consider whether each technical feature in the technical scheme is interrelated and coordinated with each other, and * * * together form a complete technical scheme to solve the corresponding technical problems. If these technical features are interrelated and interact with each other to solve corresponding technical problems, they should not be separated, but should be combined as a whole to consider whether the existing technology is open or give corresponding technical enlightenment; If the technical scheme is only composed of simple superposition of various technical features, and each technical feature works independently to complete its own functions, these technical features can be considered separately to determine whether the existing technology is open or gives corresponding technical enlightenment.
Concept explanation
Section 4 of Chapter 6 in Part IV of the Patent Examination Guide stipulates that for a utility model, one or two existing technologies can be cited to evaluate its creativity in general, and for a utility model patent formed by "simple superposition" of existing technologies, multiple existing technologies can be cited to evaluate its creativity according to the situation. "Simple superposition" is a kind of combinatorial invention. The Patent Examination Guide stipulates that when judging the creativity of an application for a patent for invention, it is usually necessary to consider whether the technical features after combination support each other in function, the difficulty of combination, the enlightenment of combination in the existing technology and the technical effect after combination. If the claimed invention only combines or connects some known products or methods, each of which works in its conventional way, and the total technical effect is the sum of the effects of each combined part, there is no functional interaction between the combined technical features, but only a simple superposition, then this combined invention is not creative. If the technical features of the combination support each other in function and achieve new technical effects; Or the combined technical effect is superior to the comprehensive effect of each technical feature, then this combination has outstanding substantive characteristics and remarkable progress, and the invention is creative. Whether each individual technical feature of the combined invention itself is completely or partially known does not affect the evaluation of the creativity of the invention.
the above-mentioned patent examination guidelines can also be used for reference in the creative evaluation of utility models, that is, to judge whether technical features are simply superimposed, the most fundamental thing is to consider whether technical features are related or not and whether they support each other in function.
Case Deduction
A patent of a utility model relates to "a single-magnet bone conduction earphone device", and its independent claim is as follows: "1. A single-magnet bone conduction earphone device, which includes a vibration system consisting of a vibration transmitting plate and a vibration plate; The vibration transmission plate comprises a ring body and a plurality of strut parts arranged between the ring body and the center thereof; A voice coil is fixedly arranged on the vibrating plate; The vibration transmitting sheet is arranged as a first circular ring body and at least two first struts which converge towards the center in the first circular ring body; The vibrating plate is arranged as a second annular body, and at least two second struts which converge towards the center in the second annular body; The vibration transmission plate and the vibration plate are fixed together; The first annular body is fixed on a magnetic system; Characterized in that the magnetic system arrangement comprises an outer magnetic conduction plate, a magnet is arranged on the outer magnetic conduction plate, an inner magnetic conduction plate is arranged on the magnet, and a gap is formed between the inner magnetic conduction plate and the outer magnetic conduction plate; The voice coil is arranged in the gap; A washer is also arranged on the ring body of the vibration transmission plate, and the other side of the washer is supported on the edge of the outer magnetic conduction plate; The outer magnetic plate is provided with a concave part, and the magnet is arranged in the concave part; The edge of that inner magnetic conduction plate and the out magnetic conduction plate are arranged flush ".
the petitioner claims that the patent involved is not creative compared with the combination of several existing technologies. Among them, Reference Document 1, which is the closest prior art, discloses most technical features of patent claim 1, and the difference between Claim 1 and Reference Document 1 lies in that the magnetic system arrangement includes an outer magnetic conduction plate, a magnet is arranged on the outer magnetic conduction plate, a gap is formed between the inner magnetic conduction plate and the outer magnetic conduction plate, and the voice coil is arranged in the gap; The outer magnetic plate is provided with a concave part, and the magnet is arranged in the concave part; The other side of the washer is supported on the edge of the outer magnetic conduction plate; The edge of that inner magnetic conduction plate and the out magnetic conduction plate are arranged flush. The technical problems to be solved in determining the patents involved based on the above distinguishing features are: how to set up a single magnet structure.
the petitioner claims that the inner and outer magnetic conducting plates, the recess for accommodating magnets, the gap for accommodating voice coils, the gasket supported on the edge of the outer magnetic conducting plate, and the flush arrangement of the edges of the inner and outer magnetic conducting plates have been disclosed by several other existing technologies respectively, so the patent involved is not creative compared with the combination of Reference Document 1 and the above-mentioned other existing technologies.
if we look at the above distinguishing features separately, the inner and outer magnetic conductive plates, the recess for holding the magnet, the gap for holding the voice coil, the gasket, and the flush arrangement of the edges of the inner and outer magnetic conductive plates have been disclosed by many other existing technologies. However, judging from the overall technical scheme of the patent involved and the closest prior art reference document 1, the patent involved claims to protect a bone conduction earphone which is a combination of a vibration system consisting of a vibration plate and a vibration plate and a magnetic system consisting of a single magnet, while reference document 1 discloses a bone conduction speaker which is a combination of a vibration system consisting of a vibration plate and a vibration plate and a magnetic system consisting of a double magnet structure. In essence, the patent involved is an improvement to solve the problem that the magnetic system with double magnet structure as the background technology mentioned above is inconvenient to assemble. The bone conduction earphone with simplified structure and convenient assembly is obtained by connecting the magnetic system consisting of an integrated external magnetic conduction plate and a single magnet structure, and the above-mentioned distinctive features cooperate as a whole to form the single magnet system of the patent involved. Firstly, the magnetic system of the patent in question is composed of an outer magnetic conductive plate with a concave part, a magnet arranged on the concave part of the outer magnetic conductive plate and an inner magnetic conductive plate arranged on the magnet. Then, in order to assemble the magnetic system and the vibration system, a gasket is arranged at the edge of the outer magnetic conductive plate, and the gap is raised due to the arrangement of the gasket, so that the voice coil can be accommodated and the inner and outer magnetic conductive plates can be arranged flush. Therefore, the above distinguishing features support and cooperate with each other to form the single magnet system of this patent. As the above-mentioned distinctive features of the patents involved constitute a single magnet system of the patents involved, the technical features in the technical scheme are mutually supportive and interrelated in structure and function, rather than simply patchwork or simple superposition of the prior art.. At this time, it should be considered as a whole technology with logical relationship, and it is not possible to superimpose and combine multiple technical schemes disclosed in the existing technology to determine that the patent right of the utility model is not creative.
from the above analysis, it can be concluded that whether the utility model patent is simply superimposed needs to consider whether there is any correlation between the technical features and whether the functional effects of the technical features support each other, especially considering the correlation between the technical features compared with the improvements made in the prior art. If the technical features that make up a technical scheme are interrelated and support each other to complete certain functions, the technical scheme is not a simple superposition, and it is not suitable for denying its creativity with multiple existing technologies. (Zhu Shuo, Patent Reexamination Board of State Intellectual Property Office)