原文： Viewing the issue in this manner allows use of traditional patentability rules and permits a more precise analysis than determining whether an accused product (which has no claim limitations on which to focus) would have been obvious in view of the prior art. 我翻的： 不论被告产品(which has no claim limitations on which to focus)相对於先前技术是 否显着，在这规则中允许了传统专利权法规则的适用，而且允许了比裁判更为精准的分析 。 关於括号内，我以为他是说被告产品没有声明限制，但就不知道focus on所欲表示的意思。 我朋友认为是：被告产品并未注意到声明限制。 在推回去好了，将括号内还原：the product has no claim limitations to focus on claim limitations(还是products?) 完整正确回答的我愿意付1000p...有请英文+专利法大师回答了 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.228.111.158