For example, an invention relates to an "automatic pulp consistency controller". In the background part of the specification, the applicant introduced a similar product produced by a domestic factory (indicating the name of the factory). After analyzing some shortcomings in the product structure, the applicant wrote that "the product has long adjustment time, low reliability, low precision and high failure rate". This kind of general devaluation without specific technical data actually constitutes anti-propaganda of products, which will inevitably lead to unnecessary disputes in the future.
(2) The understanding and description of the background technology is not accurate and objective.
First, the level of the existing technology is too high. So as to write unnecessary technical features into independent claims and narrow the scope of protection.
The second is that the existing technology level is too low. Some necessary technical features are not disclosed in the manual, but as a technical secret, the disclosed technical scheme is not creative.
Although in the process of substantive examination, the applicant can modify the background technical part according to the most relevant comparison documents retrieved by the examiner, but it cannot modify the technical content in the specification that does not belong to the existing technology. Therefore, when writing a document, you need to conduct a comprehensive search, rather than evaluating the background technology by your own subjective consciousness.