1 To correct your misconception, each claim in the claims is a complete technical solution, and each dependent claim is itself a complete technical solution and already includes the The dependent claims refer to the technical features of the independent claims, so it is unscientific to say “the independent claims plus the dependent claims”.
2 During the application process, if the technical features contained in a certain claim of A are exactly the same as those contained in the independent claim of B, it also depends on the application types of the two patents. If If both of them apply for utility model patents, and if A and B have no other substantial shortcomings, they can both be authorized. If one is an invention, or both are invention patents, the corresponding claims of the invention patent with a later filing date will not be authorized due to lack of novelty.
3 If A and B have both authorized, then the above question is whether the rights of A and B are stable. If the technical features contained in a certain claim of A are exactly the same as the technical features contained in the independent claim of B, then depending on which patent has an earlier filing date, the patent with a later filing date may be invalidated by others. There can be many reasons, such as Implementing Rules 13.1, or Patent Law 22.2. During the invalidation trial, the situations that arise are relatively complicated and will not be listed here.
4 What needs to be pointed out here is that claims are reviewed one by one. The fact that one claim has no prospect of authorization does not mean that other claims have no prospect of authorization.
5 If the claims are similar, the situation is very complicated and needs to be analyzed in detail. The concept of similarity is very vague and it is impossible to give a constructive answer.