司法实践催动下的功能性特征解释理论及其发展  

Theory for Interpreting Means-plusfunction Features and Its Development Driven by Judicial Practice

作　　者：路劍鋒 李晴[2] 

机构地区：[1]国家知识产权局专利复审委员会 [2]国家知识产权局专利局机械发明审查部

出　　处：《中国专利与商标》2012年第4期19-26,共8页China Patents & Trademarks

摘　　要：一、我国功能性特徵解释的两种标准对於功能性特徵的解释标准，在《专利审查指南》和相关司法解释中有着不同的规定。《专利审查指南》（2010）第二部分第二章第32P节规定为。“对於权利要求中所包含的功能性限定的技术特徵，应当理解为覆盖了所有能够实现所述功能的实施方式”。而最高人民法院《关於审理侵犯专利权纠纷案件应用法律若干问题的解释》（下称《解释》）第四条则规定为，“对於权利要求中以功能或者效果表述的技术特徵（下称功能性特徵），人民法院应当结合说明书和附图描述的该功能或者效果的具体实施方式及其等同的实施方式。确定该技术特徵的内容。”前者可称之为“实现功能所有方式“标准，後者可称之为“结合实施方式”标准。1. Two standards for interpreting means- plus-function features in China With regard to the standards for interpreting means- plus-function features, the Guidelines for Patent Examination and the relevant judicial interpretation have set forth different provisions. It is provided in section 3.2.1, Chapter 2 of Part 2 of the Guidelines for Patent Examination that ＂technical fea- ture defined by function in a claim shall be construed as em- bracing all the means that are capable of performing the function.＂ while it is provided in Article 4 of the Supreme People＇s Court＇s Judicial Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law to Adjudication of Cases of Dispute Arising from Patent Infringement （the Interpreta- tion） that ＂where a claim presents a technical feature in terms of function or effect, the people＇s court shall determine the contents of such technical feature on the basis of the specific embodiments and their equivalents of the technicalfeature as described in the description and the appended drawings＂. Thus, the standard mentioned in the former provi- sion is known as one of ＂all modes of performing the func- tion＂, and that mentioned in the latter provision is known as the ＂based-on-embodiment-and-equivalent＂ standard.

关 键 词：司法解释 功能 最高人民法院 解释标准 权利要求 专利权 技术 说明书 

分 类 号：D924[政治法律—刑法学]