What is patent examination and how to reply to the notice of patent examination opinions?

According to the provisions of Article 35 of the Patent Law, the Patent Office conducts substantive examination of the application for a patent for invention. The purpose of substantive examination of an application for a patent for invention is to determine whether the application for a patent for invention should be granted a patent right, especially whether it conforms to the provisions of the Patent Law on novelty, creativity and practicality. In the process of substantive examination, for most invention patent applications, the examiner will inform the applicant of the substantive examination opinions in the form of notice of examination opinions. If you can write a convincing opinion statement for the review opinion notice and modify the qualified application documents, the application may be authorized in a short time. Therefore, how to reply to the notice of examination opinions is a basic skill of patent China people. According to the review opinions of the application documents in the notice of review opinions, they can be roughly divided into two categories, namely, formal defects and substantive defects; Among them, substantive defects can be divided into insurmountable substantive defects and insurmountable substantive defects. If the application documents only have formal defects, then the patent right can be granted by modifying the application documents; If there are substantial defects in the application documents, the patent application will be rejected, which plays a decisive role in the prospect of patent application. Therefore, when reading the Notice of Review Opinions, we should pay special attention to the substantive defects it points out. Lack of novelty and/or creativity in patent application documents is one of the common substantive defects. The examiner's main basis for judging whether the application for a patent for invention is novel and/or creative is the comparison document cited in the notice. Careful study of the comparative documents is the basis for understanding the examiner's point of view. It is necessary to clarify the types of comparison documents before studying them. If the comparison file is a conflicting application, it can only be used to evaluate novelty. Then, analyze whether the technical field of the comparison document is the same, similar or related to the technical field of this application, and whether the technicians in this field will understand the current situation of the existing technology in the field mentioned in this comparison document when solving the technical problems of this application. Then, read the comparison documents one by one, understand and analyze the technical contents disclosed in the comparison documents, and compare and analyze them with the technical scheme claimed in this application respectively. When necessary, list analysis can be conducted to more clearly determine which technical features in the claims of this application are disclosed in the comparison file and which technical features in the claims of this application are not disclosed in the comparison file. As long as there are technical features that are not disclosed in the reference document, the application is novel relative to the reference document. Generally, as determined by the examiner, the reference document 1 is the closest prior art to this application. This paper compares the comparison file 1 with the technical scheme of this application, especially the technical scheme protected by the claims, and determines what technical features this application has with the comparison file 1 * *, and which technical features are not disclosed in the comparison file1,that is, to distinguish these technical features, and then determines. On this basis, it is further analyzed whether the distinguishing technical features are disclosed in other comparison documents, or are common knowledge of technicians in the field when solving the same or corresponding technical problems. If the different technical features are disclosed in other comparison documents, it is necessary to further analyze whether the role of the different technical features in the comparison document is the same as its role in solving the corresponding technical problems in this application, so as to judge whether the comparison document gives the enlightenment of combining these technical features with the comparison document 1, that is, the closest to the existing technology, in order to obtain the technical scheme required to be protected in this application. If the above-mentioned distinctive technical features have not been disclosed by other comparison documents, or even if they are disclosed, they cannot be combined with the comparison document 1, or they do not belong to common sense in the field, then the technical scheme of the application is more creative than the comparison documents listed in the notice. On the basis of the above analysis, determine whether it is necessary to modify the patent application documents, and write a convincing opinion statement according to the modification of the patent application documents. After comparing and analyzing the technical scheme of this application, especially the independent claims with the comparison documents, it is determined whether the application documents need to be modified and how to modify them. If you don't agree with the examiner's review opinion, that is, the independent claim is novel and creative relative to the comparison document quoted in the notice, you don't need to modify the claim. However, the reason why the original independent claim is novel and creative relative to the comparison document must be fully discussed in the opinion statement. If you agree or partially agree with the examiner's review opinions, such as the original independent claim does not have novelty and creativity, you should modify the independent claim. You can add the technical features recorded in the specification that can make the application have substantive characteristics to the independent claim, further limit its protection scope, or upgrade the subordinate claim that has not been commented in the notice to an independent claim, and at the same time make adaptive modifications to the specification. When submitting the revised application documents, the reasons for novelty and creativity of the revised claim shall also be discussed in the statement of opinions. If, after comparative analysis, it is considered that the original claim does not possess novelty and/or creativity, and the description does not record anything that can make the application possess outstanding substantive features, it is necessary to forward the notice of examination opinions, comparative documents and other relevant documents to the inventor and inform him of the situation, so that the inventor can judge whether the application does not possess substantive features from the perspective of technicians, and it is also an opportunity for the inventor to buffer understanding. Where the inventor proposes a modification scheme to modify the application documents, he shall, according to the inventor's instructions, discuss the reasons for novelty and creativity of the modified claim in the opinion statement as far as possible.