※ 引述《pbimg (= =+)》之铭言： : It is impermissible within the framework of section 103 to pick and choose : from any one reference only so much of it as will support a given position to : the exclusion of other parts necessary to the full appreciation of what : reference fairly suggests to one skilled in the art. : In re Wesslau, 53 C.C.P.A. 746, 353 F.2d 238, 241, 147 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 391, : 393 (CCPA 1965); see also In re Mercier, 515 F.2d 1161, 1165-66, 185 U.S.P.Q. : (BNA) 774, 778 (CCPA 1975). : 这是有关 u.s.c. 103 条答辩时的判例，请问一下 有高人可以助为说明吗? : 叱谢 基本上就是在用103核驳进步性的时候，对於prior art的解读不能断章取义， 而应该以「对熟悉该项技艺者而言，该prior art的完整代表意义」作为核驳依据 以下为原文摘录： -- The fallacy of this reasoning is that no one of the references suggests such a substitution, quite apart from the result which would be obtained thereby. Such piecemeal reconstruction of the prior art patents in the light of appellant's disclosure is contrary to the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 103. The ever present question in cases within the ambit of 35 U.S.C. § 103 is whether the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art following the teachings of the prior art at the time the invention was made. It is impermissible within the framework of section 103 to pick and choose from any one reference only so much of it as will support a given position, to the exclusion of other parts necessary to the full appreciation of what such reference fairly suggests to one of ordinary skill in the art. --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 99.38.23.85 ※ 编辑: shermanmt 来自: 99.38.23.85 (01/12 01:06)