|
  
[Success Case]
Case No. 2013 Min-Zhuan-Shang-Zi 26, Intellectual Property Court.
[Decision Digest]
However, the combinations in exhibits 1 to 4, in exhibits 1 and 2, in exhibits 1 and 3, in exhibits 1 and 4, in exhibits 2 and 3, and in exhibits 3 and 4 can all prove that claim 1 of the patent at issue lacks non-obviousness (inventive step). According to paragraph 2 of Article 16, Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act, the appellant shall not claim any rights from the respondent.
|
