Statement of Opinions on the Request for Invalidation
Patent Reexamination Board:
The patentee received the "Patent Invalidity" submitted by the petitioner referred by the Patent Reexamination Board. Request for Declaration" and the attached Comparative Document 1 and Comparative Document 2. Subsequently, we received supplementary opinions and Comparative Document 3. We now defend the reasons and evidence for requesting the invalidation of this patent. The specific defense opinions are as follows:
Modification Description
The patentee modified the claims, deleted claim 1, and merged claims 2 to 4 into new independent claims.
The revised claims are as follows: (If during the exam, the question requires you to write the revised claims alone, you can omit)
If there are other substantive and formal modifications, It must be explained, such as deleting claims or technical solutions.
The patentee believes that the revised independent claim 1 does not exceed the scope recorded in the original description and claims, nor does it expand the scope of protection of the original patent, which complies with Article 2 of the Patent Law. Paragraphs 2 and 3 and their Implementing Rules and Examination Guidelines provide for the modification of patent documents during the invalidation period.
Request the Review Board to make modifications based on the revised claims.
The specific reasons are as follows.
The defense has different responses, and the principles of request are to respond and state the request one by one according to the request of the petitioner.
Again, state each reason in a targeted manner. Some of the reasons are not invalid, or the evidentiary reasons that are not considered should be mentioned at the same time when explaining the claim.
There are separate explanations for multiple invalidation reasons for one claim
The merged single right may be a combination of modifications to the previous claims, so the invalidation request must be All the reasons given were answered one by one.
To sum up, the patentee believes that the revised claim 1 complies with the relevant provisions of the Patent Law, its Implementing Rules and Examination Guidelines, and the reasons for invalidation raised by the petitioner are not valid. Therefore, we request the Patent Reexamination Board to maintain the validity of this patent in accordance with the law.
If there is additional evidence and materials, this part should also be explained.