期刊文献+

从授权和确权两个视角解读制药用途权利要求 被引量:1

Interpretation of the Swiss-Type Claim from the Perspectives of Patent Rights Authorization and Determination
下载PDF
导出
摘要 无论是在专利审查抑或是在司法审判中,制药用途权利要求,亦称瑞士型权利要求的解读一直是引发争议的焦点,本文通过追溯制药用途权利要求的由来,透过若干典型案例的分析,从授权和确权视角分别探讨了制药用途的证实及其解释,以期能够为该类专利申请的审查提供借鉴,同时为医药领域的申请人在撰写申请材料的环节提供参考。 The interpretation of the Swiss-type claim has long been highly controversial, no matter in the process of patent examination or judicial practice. This paper traced the origin of the Swiss-type claim, and meanwhile discussed the confirmation and interpretation of the pharmaceutical use through several typical cases, from the perspectives of patent rights authorization and determination, hoping to provide a reference for examiners and applicants in this fi led.
作者 徐丹 XU Dan(Patent Examination Cooperation (Beijing) Center of the Patent Offi ce, CNIPA, Beijing 100160)
出处 《中国发明与专利》 2019年第3期116-120,共5页 China Invention & Patent
关键词 瑞士型权利要求 制药用途 授权 确权 Swiss-type claim pharmaceutical use patent rights authorization patent rights determination
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献14

  • 1Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Baker Norton ( Bristol-Myers Squibb 2001 ).
  • 2PROCES-VERBAL, de la 81e session du CONSEIL DADMINISTRATION (Munich, du 5 au 7 septembre 2000) ,CA/PV 81 e, http: ff documents, epo. org/projects/babylon/eponet, nsf/0/dd48584f46d53239c125727e004187f3/$ file/fcpv081, pdf.
  • 3Revision of the EPC : Articles 52 (4) and 54 ( 5 ) ", CA/PL 7199, points 19 and 24 - 26, Orig. : German, Munich, 2.3.1999, http:// documents, epo. org/projects/babylon/eponet, nsf./0/edff57c40d17b46c1257280003e7a4c/$file/capl 99007_en. pdf.
  • 4Revision des EP?, Verwaltungsrat (zur Beschlu? fassung), Ausschu? "Patentrecht" (zur Unterrichtung) CA/110/99, page 1, point 1, No. 5, 19, Orig. : englisch, MUnchen, den 07. 12. 1999, http: // documents, epo. org/projects/babylon/eponet, nsf/0/ 8e4fga2248f99224c125727c005087eg/$ file/dc99110, pdf.
  • 5Basic Proposal - Explanatory notes, MR/18/00 e, submitted by the Swiss delegation; accepted by the Conference and included as Explanatory Remarks in MR/2/00.
  • 6http://documents, epo. org./projects/babylon/eponet, nsf/0/fa8da239660827a4c12572810041373f/$ file/conf_proceed_mt0024 en. pdf, CONFERENCE OF THE CONTRACTINGSTATES TO REVISE THE 1973 EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION, Munich, 20 to 29 November 2000, Conference Proceedings, MR/24/00, Point 139.
  • 7http ://eur-lex. europa, eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ, do? uri : CONSLEG : 1992R1768 : 20070126 : EN : PDF, ECC 1768/98, Art. 1, Art. 3.
  • 8Case C-392/97.http: //europa. eu. int/smertapi/cgi/sga_ doc? smartapi! celex-plus! ! CELEXnumdoc&lg = en&numdoc =61997J0392.
  • 9EPO G02/08, Reason of decisions, piont 6.5, " If deemed necessary, the freedom of medical practitioners may be protected by other means on the national level ( see also G 1/04, points 6.1 and 6.3 of the Reasons). ".
  • 10http://eur-lex, europa, eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ, do? uri = CONSLEG:2001L0083:20091005 :EN:PDF , EC2001/83.

共引文献17

同被引文献3

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部