2. Many patent applications are based on new technical solutions improved by others. For example, the protection scope of the prior patent 1 is A+B+C+D, the protection scope of the latter patent 2 is A+B+C+D+E, and the protection scope of the latter patent 3 is A+B+C+E(E is not equal to d). Then, although both Patent 2 and Patent 3 can get patent certificates, their values are completely different due to the limitation of the scope of protection of their claims: the scope of Patent 2 is smaller than that of Patent 1, and the implementation of Patent 2 needs the permission of Patent 1 patentee, otherwise it will infringe the patent right of Patent 1 (this is also one of the cases where some people say that they still have effective and stable patents). However, the inventor of Patent 3 may have made circumvention design on the basis of Patent 1, bypassed the protection scope of Patent 1 and obtained a new patent right, and its implementation will not be affected by Patent 1. So, I want to know what kind of situation your utility model and your colleague's invention belong to? What needs to be added and emphasized is that the patent is at the expense of publicity, so your colleagues will know the content of your utility model patent sooner or later. If he improves, innovates or avoids designing on your basis, he will be able to file a new patent application sooner or later, which is legal and reasonable.
If you think that your colleague's invention patent application should not be authorized by the invention patent, you can request the Patent Reexamination Board to declare the invention patent invalid.
For reference ~