美國發明法下之專利有效性──以專利審理暨訴願委員會為中心

A Study on Patent Validity under the American Invents Act - Focusing on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

王偉哲(Wei-Che Wang)

指導教授 ： 謝銘洋

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/科際整合法律學研究所/碩士(2017年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201700700

摘要

近年來美國專利法中最大修正的美國發明法（American Invents Act）已於2012年施行。其中新法所創設的專利審理暨訴願委員會（Patent Trial and Appeal Board，PTAB）與其轄下的複審制度：多方複審程序（Inter Partes Review，IPR）、領證後複審程序（Post Grant Review，PGR）和涵蓋商業方法專利複審程序（Covered Business Method Review，CBM）尤其受到關注。

本文聚焦探討IPR、CBM、PGR等程序的特殊之處，透過歷年累積的案件數據呈現PTAB於專利有效性爭訟時的重要地位，包括PTAB對於處理受挑戰請求項之情形以及上訴審聯邦巡上訴法院（Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit，CAFC）審理見解之趨勢。並針對專利有效性爭訟中常作為重要爭點之關鍵：專利適格性、新穎性、非顯而易知性、請求項範圍建構、聲請修正請求項等，各以新近經過PTAB和CAFC審理之案件進行分析，藉以掌握美國專利有效性訴訟的見解趨勢，作為我國企業於爭訟時可運用之策略與參考。

關鍵字

美國發明法 ； 專利有效性 ； 專利審理暨訴願委員會 ； 專利行政救濟 ； 美國專利

並列摘要

The American Invents Act was passed by U.S. Congress and was signed into law on September 16, 2011. The law represents the most significant change to the U.S. patent system since 192, and closely resembles previously proposed legislation in the Senate in its previous session. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was formed as one part of the American Invents Act, handling contested cases such as Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post Grant Review (PGR) and Transitional Program for Covered Bussiness Method Patents (CBM).

This Study is focusing on the status and importance of IPR, PGR and CBM. By examining the statistics of number of the cases over the years, discussing the reason to value this procedure in finding the validity of patents in patent trials. The scope including presenting the condition of cases instituted in PTAB and the cases appealed to Court of Appeals for the Federal Ciruit (CAFC). Furthermore, this study lists 5 key issues in patent validity trials to observe the opoinon from the court, including patent eligibility, novelty, non-obviousness, claim construction and motion to amend. Cases were from PTAB and CAFC between 2015 and 2016. This may offer the companies in Taiwan to have better strategis to apply during U.S. patent litigation.

並列關鍵字

American Invents Act ； AIA ； Patent Validity ； The Patent Trial and Appeal Board ； PTAB

參考文獻

沈宗倫（2013）。〈由專利法教示因果關係論專利進步性：以組合專利與類似組合專利為中心〉，《國立國立臺灣大學法學論叢》，42卷2期，頁317-379。

劉振泰、蔡岳勳（2015）。〈從美國專利改革法案看美國專利法新穎性要件之變革〉，《智慧財產評論》，第13卷第1期，頁119-165。

鄭煜騰、王偉霖（2011）。〈美國專利法上的非顯而易知性研究〉，《智慧財產評論》，9卷2期，頁44-98。

蔡佳穎（2016）。〈美國專利多方複審程序與領證後複審程序之概述〉，《科技法律透析》，第28卷第4期，頁32-41。

Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010).