-
-
Services
-
-
13
2026-03
One Case a Day | China: Determining the Closest Prior Art Requires Attention to the Technical Problem to Be Solved - Invalidation Decision No. 25725 (2015)
Case Introduction
Yesterday we shared a case highlighting the importance of the technical field in determining the closest prior art. Today, we continue with another case to illustrate another crucial factor related to determining the closest prior art—the technical problem. The closest prior art should be connected to the technical problem addressed by the invention. Otherwise, a person skilled in the art would not be motivated to complete the invention based on it. For example, the prior art may mention, aim to solve, have solved, or allow a person skilled in the art to recognize such a technical problem.
Case Information
Application Number: 00800653.9
Title of Invention: Device for Centering the Head Section of Pharmaceutical Containers, Particularly Ampoules in Filling Equipment
Patentee: Robert Bosch GmbH
Requester: Shanghai Yufa Pharmaceutical Equipment Co., Ltd.
Request Date: September 11, 2014
Case Number: 4W103276
Decision Number: No. 25725
Decision Date: April 15, 2015
Key Points of the Decision
In the involved patent, as shown in the figure, due to the small volume of ampoule 2, the head section 1 must be centered relative to the vertically moving filling needle 11. This is because the filling needle 11 needs to extend into the head section 1 to dispense a certain amount of filling material, and contact between the filling needle 11 (whose diameter is only slightly smaller) and the head section 1 must be avoided.
Evidence 1 discloses a filling and capping machine, for example, for beverage bottles. Although it also involves positioning beverage bottles, during the filling process, it only requires keeping the bottle upright and does not have the need for precise centering as in the involved patent.
Since Evidence 1 is unrelated to the technical problem addressed by the involved patent, a person skilled in the art, aiming to solve the stated technical problem (precise centering of ampoules during filling), would not use Evidence 1's beverage bottle filling device as a starting point for development. Therefore, Evidence 1 is unsuitable as the closest prior art for the involved patent.
undefined
Contact Us
No. 93, Ganjiang West Rd., Suzhou, 215002, P.R.C.
Business Area
Follow Us
