论文部分内容阅读
首先,本文简要介绍了Therasense公司(于2004年被Abbott集团收购,简称安培公司)同Becton公司对于专利号为“US5,820,551”美国专利的纠纷过程,并重点讨论了本案的主要争议——安培公司是否属于违反美国专利法中关于不正当行为的规定。其次,联邦巡回上诉法院在本案作出联席判决时,提出了新的不正当行为判断标准,并依此标准作出撤销并发回重审原不正当行为认定部分的判决。详细对比分析了不正当行为判断的新旧标准,不正当行为新判断标准中的主观欺骗意图判断标准和重要性判断标准均缩窄了认定范围,并且对于重要性的判断标准由原来的五种变为新的一种,同时权衡主观欺骗意图和重要性这两个要件的移动尺度法被废除。联邦巡回上诉法院的判例调整了不正当行为的判断标准,解决了目前不正当行为存在的不确定性高、易被滥用、权利人负担重等问题。新标准提高了认定门槛,并具有较高的确定性从而减轻了申请人的负担,提高了诉讼效率、节约了社会资源。另外,本文认为,在考虑新标准对美国专利体系的影响时,还应和《美国发明法案》共同考量。
First of all, this article briefly introduces Therasense (acquired by Abbott Group in 2004, referred to as Ampere) and Becton’s dispute over US Patent No. “US5,820,551” and focuses on the main controversy in this case - - Ampere Company Is in Violation of U.S. Patent Law on Improper Conduct. Second, when the Federal Circuit Court of Appeal made a joint judgment in this case, it proposed a new standard of judgment on unfair conduct and made a judgment based on this standard of revocation and re-trial of the original part of the original act of improper conduct. The contrastive analysis of the old and new standards of misconduct judgment in detail, the subjective fraud intention judgment standard and the importance judgment standard in the new judgment standard of misconduct have narrowed the scope of recognition, and the criteria for judging the importance from the original five kinds of changes As a new kind of moving scale method that weighs both the intent and the importance of subjective deception is abolished. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit adjusted the judgment criteria for improper conduct and solved the problems of high uncertainty, abuse of rights and heavy burden on right holders that exist in the current improper acts. The new standard has raised the threshold of recognition and has high certainty, thus alleviating the burden on applicants, increasing the efficiency of litigation and saving social resources. In addition, this article argues that when considering the impact of the new standard on the U.S. patent system, it should also be considered in conjunction with the United States Invention Act.