Some review opinions are undoubtedly correct, but the following situations cannot be ruled out: the review time is very tight, the examiner gives a basic rejection opinion and asks the applicant to explain in detail, and it will be clear that foreign review opinions are similar when retrial. Another situation is that today's knowledge is expanding and the classification is getting finer and finer. Evaluators may not know enough about the specific situation in this field, and may make specific or abstract and vague evaluation opinions. If this situation is proved to be wrong, we must compare it carefully and work hard for the best interests of the applicant.
2. Understand the main differences of technical solutions and analyze the unexpected technical impact brought by these differences.
(1) Due to the limited knowledge and experience of the agent, many situations are the same at first glance, and it is difficult to distinguish the substantive differences. Next, we should actively cooperate with the inventor, let him understand the relevant rules, build trust, encourage and urge the inventor to provide technical support, and let the agent use familiar laws and regulations and defense skills to make a lot of words.
(2) Due to the obvious similarity of technologies, it is the key to obtain patent application approval to strictly analyze the fundamental differences between technical solutions and existing technologies.
(3) In order to be obviously different from the prior art, appropriate modifications should be made when necessary to obtain a reasonable scope of protection.
(4) In the statement of the situation, technical information should be disclosed as much as possible, so as to provide substantive support and deal with the review and revision of the allegations.
(5) Step by step and demonstrate according to the reasons. Initially, when drafting a complaint, it was a gradual process, but when reviewing a case, all rights must be upheld.