Collegiate examination of patent reexamination request

In the review process, the reasons and evidence on which the veto decision is based should generally be reviewed. When necessary, the reasons and evidence that should be tried before making a decision of rejection may be reviewed. The review of the above-mentioned reasons and evidence that should be tried does not violate the principle of avoiding trial-level losses.

When reviewing the retrial cases actually rejected by the collegial panel, it can refer to the following review order to judge whether it belongs to the reason that the original trial level should try:

(1) Whether the patent application complies with Article 5 or Article 25 of the Patent Law or Paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Implementing Rules;

(2) Whether the modification of the patent application documents complies with the provisions of Article 33 of the Patent Law, or whether the divisional application complies with the provisions of Paragraph 1 of Article 43 of the Implementing Rules;

(3) Whether the patent application complies with the provisions of Paragraph 4 of Article 22, Paragraph 3 of Article 26 or Paragraph 1 of Article 31 of the Patent Law;

(4) Whether the patent application complies with the provisions of Paragraph 4 of Article 26 of the Patent Law, Paragraph 1 of Article 20 of the Implementing Rules or Paragraph 2 of Article 21;

(5) Whether the patent application complies with the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article 22, Article 9 of the Patent Law or Paragraph 1 of Article 13 of the Implementing Rules;

(6) Whether the patent application complies with the provisions of the third paragraph of Article 22 of the Patent Law.

When necessary, the collegial panel may introduce common-sense evidence known in the technical field, such as technical dictionaries, technical manuals, textbooks, etc. In any of the following circumstances, the collegial panel shall issue a Notice of Review to inform the petitioner to review:

(1) The reexamination decision maintains the original rejection decision;

(2) According to the relevant provisions of the Patent Law and its detailed rules for implementation, the original rejection decision can only be revoked if the applicant for reexamination needs to modify the application documents;

(3) The applicant for reexamination needs to provide further evidence or explain relevant issues;

(4) Need to introduce reasons or evidence that are not put forward in the rejection decision.

The applicant for reexamination shall reply within one month from the date of receiving the notice of reexamination. If no reply is made at the expiration of the time limit, the request for reexamination shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.