What are the substantive requirements for obtaining a patent right?

I. Novelty, Novelty, Novelty, Novelty, the concept of novelty means that before the filing date, no identical invention or utility model was published in domestic and foreign publications, used in China or known to the public in other ways, and no identical invention or utility model was applied to the Patent Office by others and recorded in the patent application documents published after the filing date (including the filing date). Therefore, the invention and utility model with novelty should be different from the existing technology, and also different from the invention or utility model that others applied to the Patent Office before the filing date and recorded in the patent application documents published after the filing date (including the filing date). The principle of novelty examination When examining novelty, we should judge it according to the following principles: (1) The application for a patent for invention or utility model under examination is substantially the same as the related content of the invention or utility model submitted by others to the Patent Office before the date of application and published after the date of application (hereinafter referred to as the application was published earlier), and its technical field, technical problems solved, technical scheme and expected effect are substantially the same. It should be noted that when judging novelty, we should first judge whether the technical scheme of the patent application under examination is substantially the same as that of the comparison document. If the technical scheme defined in the patent application is essentially the same as the technical scheme disclosed in the reference document, and the technicians in the technical field can determine that they can be applied to the same technical field, solve the same technical problems and have the same expected effect, they are considered to be the same invention or utility model. (2) When comparing and judging novelty respectively, each claim of an application for a patent for invention or utility model shall be compared with the relevant technical content of each invention or utility model published in advance, and shall not be compared with the combination of several inventions or utility models published in advance or the combination of multiple technical solutions in a comparison document. That is, judging the novelty of an application for a patent for invention or utility model applies the principle of separate comparison. This is different from the method of judging the creativity of an application for a patent for invention or utility model. The examination criteria for judging whether an invention or utility model is novel shall be based on the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 22 of the Patent Law. In order to help master this benchmark, several common situations in novelty judgment are given below. 1. Invention or utility model with the same content If the invention or utility model required to be protected is exactly the same as the technical content disclosed in the comparison document, or it is only a simple text transformation, then the invention or utility model does not possess novelty. In addition, the same contents mentioned above should be understood as including technical contents that can be directly determined from the comparison documents without any doubt. For example, the claim of an invention patent application is "a motor rotor core, which is made of NdFe 14b permanent magnet alloy and has a tetragonal crystal structure". If the reference document discloses "a motor rotor core made of NdFe 14b magnet", the above claims will lose novelty, because those skilled in the art are familiar with the so-called "NdFe6544 magnet", that is, the main phase is NdFe6544. 2. Specific (bottom) concept and general (top) concept If the invention or utility model to be protected is compared with the comparison file, the only difference is that the former uses the general (top) concept, while the latter uses the specific (bottom) concept to define the technical features of the same nature, then the disclosure of the specific (bottom) concept makes the invention or utility model defined by the general (top) concept lose its novelty. For example, the reference document discloses that a product is made of copper, which makes the invention or utility model of similar products made of metal lose novelty. However, the disclosure of this copper product does not make the invention or utility model of the same product made of other specific metals other than copper lose novelty. On the contrary, the disclosure of the general (upper) concept does not affect the novelty of the invention or utility model defined by the specific (lower) concept. For example, a product "made of metal" disclosed in the comparison document does not make the invention or utility model of similar products "made of copper" lose novelty. For another example, the difference between the claimed invention or utility model and the reference document is that chlorine is selected to replace halogen or another specific halogen fluoride in the reference document, so the disclosure of halogen or fluorine in the reference document will not lead to the loss of novelty of the invention or utility model restricted by chlorine. 3. Direct substitution of idiomatic means If the difference between the claimed invention or utility model and the comparison document is only the direct substitution of idiomatic means in this technical field, the invention or utility model does not possess novelty. For example, the reference document discloses a device fixed by screws, and the claimed invention or utility model only changes the screw fixing mode of the device into the bolt fixing mode, so the invention or utility model does not have novelty. 4. Numerical value and numerical range If there are technical features in the invention or utility model limited by numerical value or continuously changing numerical range, such as the size, temperature, pressure and composition content of parts, and other technical features are the same as those in the comparison document, novelty judgment shall be made in accordance with the following provisions. (1) The numerical value or numerical range disclosed in the comparison document falls within the numerical range of the technical features defined above, which will destroy the novelty of the claimed invention or utility model.