The principle of universal application is used to judge infringement, which is different from the scope of application of novelty and creativity.
Generally speaking, the determination of infringement only compares the sovereign goods with the products involved. If the technical features of the products involved fall within the scope of protection of the claims, it constitutes infringement (including the same and equivalent situations). Other people's products only contain technologies A, C and D, but lack technical feature B and have no equivalent technical features, so there is no infringement.
Only A 1, c and d have the same infringement judgment.
What if the a in the front part is changed to A 1, b, c and d little by little? Fall into the patent of ABCD? -see if A 1 is equal to a, if so, it belongs to the scope of protection, otherwise it does not.
Let's talk about the novelty of patent application first. According to the provisions of the Patent Law, novelty means that the invention or utility model does not belong to the existing technology, and no unit or individual filed an application with the patent administration department of the State Council before the filing date, and it was recorded in the patent application documents published or announced after the filing date.
This standard doesn't seem to meet your problem? Are you asking about creativity?
Also, in the example you cited, Claim 4 cited 1 sovereignty and two subordinate rights, which also cited the same sovereignty. This situation should not exist.
What needs to be added is that being able to apply for a patent does not mean that you will not infringe on the products produced with this patent application. If the new patent contains all the technical features of the previous patent, it is still an infringement without the permission of the previous patent holder. This often happens in legal practice.
You still need to understand some basic concepts. ...
There are still questions to ask.