The contents of the substantive review include:
Whether it conforms to the provisions of Articles 5 and 25 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the subject matter of the patent application violates national laws, social morality or hinders public interests, and whether it belongs to the scope where the patent right cannot be granted; Whether it conforms to the provisions of Article 3 1 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the applicant has exceeded the scope recorded in the original specification (including the attached drawings) and the claims when modifying the application or application scheme; Whether it meets the provisions of Article 33 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the patent application meets the requirements of oneness; Whether it conforms to the definition of invention stipulated in the Patent Law and its detailed rules for implementation, that is, the new technical scheme proposed for the product, method or its improvement; Whether it meets the provisions of Article 18 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law, that is, whether the invention writing of the patent application meets the specified requirements, and make a clear and complete description of the invention to enable the technical personnel in the technical field to realize whether it meets the provisions of Article 20 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law, that is, whether the claim clearly and concisely expresses the scope of the requested protection, whether the claim is based on the specification, and whether the independent claim contains all necessary technologies to solve the technical problems of the invention. And whether it meets the priority requirements of the application.
(1) Whether it complies with the provisions of Article 5 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the subject matter of the patent application violates national laws, social morality or harms public interests;
(2) Whether it conforms to the provisions of Article 25 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the subject matter of the patent application belongs to the scope where the patent right cannot be granted;
(3) Whether it meets the provisions of Article 33 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the patent application meets the requirements of oneness;
(4) Whether it complies with the provisions of Article 31 of the Patent Law, that is, whether the applicant has gone beyond the scope recorded in the original specification (including the appended drawings) and the claims when amending the application or filing a divisional application;
(5) Whether it conforms to the definition of invention stipulated in the Patent Law and its detailed rules for implementation, that is, the new technical scheme proposed for the product, method or its improvement.
(6) Whether it complies with the provisions of Article 18 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law, that is, whether the writing of the invention for which the patent application is applied meets the specified requirements, and making a clear and complete description of the invention to be protected, so that technicians in their technical fields can realize it;
(7) Whether it complies with the provisions of Article 20 of the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law, that is, whether the claim clearly and concisely states the scope of protection, whether the claim is based on the specification, and whether the independent claim contains all the necessary technical features to solve the technical problems to be solved by the invention.
(eight) whether the application meets the requirements of priority, if it is found that others filed another patent application on the same subject between the priority date and the application date, or found that relevant documents were made public during this period through search, the priority requirements will be examined; At the same time, judge the patentability of the invention patent application according to the retrieved comparison file. Within three years from the date of application, China National Intellectual Property Administration may, upon the request of the applicant at any time, conduct a substantive examination of the application; If the applicant fails to request substantive examination within the time limit without justifiable reasons, the application shall be deemed to have been withdrawn. When necessary, China National Intellectual Property Administration can examine the application for a patent for invention on its own.
Reference article:/subtitle/162403/162403.htm.