[Success Case]
Case No. 2015 Jing-Su-Zi 10406302040
[Decision Digest]
In the Notice of Examination Opinion dated March 21, 2014 and the original disposition, the original disposing authority did not specify concrete reasons regarding how claims 5 to 8 do not comply with paragraph 2 of Article 22 of the Patent Act. The original disposing authority also did not explain how exhibits should be combined. Referring to paragraph 2 of Article 45 of the Patent Act and the intent of the examination criteria, the original disposing authority has failed to explain item by item why the case is not patentable, thus constituting the failure to examine the application item by item and violation of the principle of clarity and definiteness of law.
(Collected by TIPO as a representative case in Compilation of Patent Administrative Proceeding Cases2014-2015)
