2025年05月04日
拒絶理由通知への対策～引用文献に対して反論しても意味がない？【リライト版】
補正前と補正後のどちらの本願発明と引用文献を対比すればいい？
補正する場合は、本願発明ががらっと変わる！
それなら補正前の本願発明と、引用文献と対比しても意味がない？
ただ、こんな考え方もあるのだと、知っておいて損はない考え方です。
✓「引用文献」に対して反論ではなく、「論理づけ」に対して反論する
✓本願発明がある発明から容易に発明できたと「論理付け」された
（ある発明＝引用文献１に記載の発明（引用発明１））
（この点は別の記事で述べます。本記事では「極論」をお話しします。）
「証拠の一例」に対してするものではないというのが極論です。
ただそれならと、Ａさんに別の例を示されたら終わりです。
そのために「例示」を攻めても有効な反論になるとは限りません。
それでも、それに対して指摘しても意味がないこともあります。
✓引用文献の中には、全く読まなくてもよいものもある
（＝審査官の言うことを受け入れても、対策の方向性が変わらない）
そんなときでも、対策のポイントを見極めることが重要です。
反論に集中できることになります。
別の記事でさらに詳述します。
✓拒絶理由通知への対策は、拒絶理由（審査官）を敵視するものでない
出願人のメリットだけでなく、審査官のメリットにもなるものです。
その上で、本記事や、本ブログの他の記事を参考にしてください。
＜お知らせ＞
本記事がいいなと感じたら「シェア」や「いいね！」をお願いします！
「シェア」「Tweet」「いいね！」ボタンは一番下にあります。
スマホの方は、青字に白の「鳥」や「ｆ」ボタンを押してください！
当ブログのサイトマップはこちら！
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
【ＰＲ】個人様・社長様に特化＆元特許審査官が運営する特許事務所！
「おすすめの特許事務所」「おすすめの弁理士」を目指します！
そんな東雲特許事務所（しののめ特許事務所）へのお問い合わせは、
お気軽にこちらからどうぞ！
https://www.patande.com/お問い合わせ/
（↑お問い合わせフォームが開くだけですのでご安心ください。）
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
東雲特許事務所（しののめ特許事務所）
弁理士 田村誠治（元特許庁審査官）
【東京都港区新橋】【東京都中央区八丁堀】【東京都北区田端】
【稀有な経歴】特許技術者→特許庁審査官→特許事務所運営
【楽しいホームページ】
個人発明家・小規模事業者専門の東雲（しののめ）特許事務所
https://www.patande.com/
【特許ドットコム】
個人・小規模事業者のための特許出願
https://tokkkyo.com/
【実案ドットコム】
個人・小規模事業専門＆元特許審査官による実用新案申請代理
https://www.jitsuan.com/
【商標ドットコム】
信頼・明確・安心の商標登録申請代理＜商標ドットコム＞
https://www.shohyou.com/
【ここだけの情報満載のブログ】
個人発明家向け特許・発明教室～目指せ一攫千金！～
https://www.tokkyoblog.com/
【本音モードのブログ】
弁理士のプライベートブログ～弁理士の視点＆審査官の視点～
https://ameblo.jp/s-tam1104/
【Facebook】
Facebookページで、より密な情報交換の場をご提供します。
https://www.facebook.com/shinonomepat
【note】
noteはじめました！ブログとYouTubeを同時に楽しめます。
https://note.com/tokkyoblog
https://youtu.be/sJgjSOk72i4
音は出ませんのでぜひご覧ください
＜機械翻訳＞
Countermeasures for a notice of reason for refusal: Is there no point in arguing against cited references? [Rewritten version]
(Q) A number of cited references were presented in a notice of reason for refusal.
I'm not sure how to compare them in this case.
Should I compare each cited reference with the present invention?
Or should I compare the combination of cited references with the present invention?
If I make amendments, before the amendment? Or after the amendment?
Should I compare the present invention with the cited reference before or after the amendment?
If I make amendments, the present invention will change drastically!
So is there no point in comparing the present invention before the amendment with the cited reference?
I don't really understand...
(A) It's difficult to think about comparing the present invention with the cited reference.
I understand the concerns you have in this question.
So, in this article, I'll introduce one way of thinking.
It's a case-by-case basis for each individual case.
However, it doesn't hurt to know that there is such a way of thinking.
■Is it pointless to argue against cited documents?
This is a bit of an extreme view, but as an argument against a reason for refusal,
✓ Do not argue against the cited documents, but against the reasoning.
The reason for refusal under Article 29, paragraph 2 (inventive step) of the Patent Act is
✓ The reasoning was that the invention in question could easily have been invented from a certain invention
(The invention = the invention described in cited document 1 (cited invention 1))
Cited documents are an "example of evidence" to give objectivity to the reasoning.
(The meaning of cited document 1 is quite different from that of cited document 2 and onwards.)
(I will discuss this point in another article. In this article, I will talk about the "extreme view.")
An argument against a reason for refusal is against the "reasoning."
The extreme view is that it is not against an "example of evidence."
●
For example, suppose that A makes a certain "assertion" and gives an "example" for it.
You argue against that "assertion."
Let's suppose that the "example" is wrong.
Would you argue against the "examples"?
Let's say you argue against the examples.
However, if A gives you another example, that's the end of it.
The ultimate goal is to argue against the "argument."
Attacking the "examples" for that purpose is not necessarily an effective argument.
Roughly speaking, arguing against a notice of refusal is the same thing.
Arguing against cited references (especially references 2 and below) is not necessarily effective.
Furthermore, let's say the cited references are wrong.
Even so, there are times when it is meaningless to point them out.
This can be taken to the extreme:
✓ Some cited references do not need to be read at all
(= even if you accept what the examiner says, the direction of your countermeasures will not change)
As in this question, you may be confused by the large number of cited references.
Even in such cases, it is important to identify the key points of your countermeasures.
You will be able to concentrate on your countermeasures.
●
What did you think?
I think there are some parts that may be misunderstood unless you explain in more detail.
I will go into more detail in another article.
As I always say,
✓ The way to deal with an office action is not to treat the reason for refusal (the examiner) as an enemy.
If you respond appropriately, an office action can serve as a guide to patents.
It is important to respond smoothly to an office action.
It is not only to the applicant's advantage, but also to the examiner's.
Please fully understand this point.
With that in mind, please refer to this article and other articles on this blog.
(Even if the example of Mr. A above is not appropriate, please do not argue (lol))
