標題: 美國專利核准後行政撤銷機制之現在與未來--以再審查與核准後審查為中心
The Present and Future of U.S. Patent Post-Grant Administrative Revocation Mechanism--Focusing on Reexamination and Post-Grant Review
作者: 賴柏翰
Lai, Po-Han
王立達
Wang, Li-Dar
科技法律研究所
關鍵字: 再審查;核准後審查;美國發明法案;行政撤銷機制;專利有效性;reexamination;post-grant review;America Invents Act;administrative revocation mechanism;patent validity
公開日期: 2010
摘要: 再審查程序是美國在專利核准後,用以提升核准後專利品質,確保專利具備「有效性」的行政撤銷機制。 由於行政撤銷機制係針對有市場價值的專利進行審理,無論在時間或金錢之支出均較訴訟有效率;又依實證結果,無論是單方再審查或是雙方再審查,專利被撤銷或變更的比例均遠高於訴訟,故近年來提起再審查之案件逐漸增加。然而再審查僅接受以專利或印刷刊物等先前技術當作證據,說明系爭專利不具可專利性的建議撤銷理由,且雙方再審查有沉重的拘束力效果,導致再審查使用機會受限。 因此,於2011年美國發明法案中,國會對「雙方再審查」程序略作修正,並創設「核准後審查」程序,請求人得以所有在訴訟中的專利無效抗辯作為提起事由。惟為避免對專利權人的騷擾,設有提起時間之限制。 本文除探究現行再審查程序規定與運作現況外,並將討論美國發明法案是否妥適。
Reexamination is an administrative revocation mechanism which is designed to ensure validity of granted patents in the United States for improving the quality of the patent system. Since such mechanism focuses only on patents with market value, which saves more time and money than litigation does, and, according to empirical statistics, both the possibility of patent cancellation or changes in ex parte reexamination and inter parte reexamination are higher than that in civil actions, the frequency of requesting of reexamination is increasing in recent times. However, since the accepted evidence for proposed grounds of rejection in reexamination proceeding is limited to patents or printed publications prior art, and, furthermore, inter parte reexamination results in serious estoppel effect, the use of reexamination is hindered. As a result, inter parte reexamination is slightly modified and, most important of all, “Post-Grant Review” process was established in the America Invents Act of 2011, which allows all grounds permitted in patent litigation with respect to invalidity to be raised in Post-Grant Review. Nevertheless, in order to avoid increasing the burden on patentees, the time to file requests for the Post-Grant Review proceeding is therefore limited. This thesis focuses not only on the current operation of the reexamination system but also the appropriateness of the America Invents Act of 2011.
URI: http://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079538520
http://hdl.handle.net/11536/41337
Appears in Collections:Thesis


Files in This Item:

  1. 852001.pdf