Recently, a patent invalidation case between Beijing Sanju Sunshine Intellectual Property and Beijing Yiju Law Firm and Sichuan Yingjie Electric Co., Ltd. was concluded. The State Intellectual Property Office made the No. 565744 invalidation review decision, declaring the 201320579133. owned by Yingjie Electric CompanyThe utility model patent of No. X "a power supply distribution system" is invalid.
Here's a closer look:
Paragraph 2 of Article 22 of the Patent Law stipulates that: novelty means that the invention or utility model does not belong to the prior art; No unit or individual has filed an application for the same invention or utility model with the patent administration department before the filing date, and it is recorded in the patent application documents published or the patent documents published after the application date.
If all the technical features of the claims are disclosed by the prior art, and the technical fields, the technical problems to be solved and the technical effects obtained are substantially the same, the above technical solution is not novel.
Paragraph 3 of Article 22 of the Patent Law stipulates that "inventive step refers to the invention having outstanding substantive features and significant progress compared with the prior art, and the utility model having substantial features and progress."
If the technical solution claimed for protection has distinguishing features compared with the closest comparison document, and the distinguishing feature is disclosed by other comparison documents or is common knowledge, the claim does not have an inventive step with respect to the prior art.
In this case, claim 1 of the patent in question requires the protection of a power distribution system. Exhibit 4 of our submission discloses a study of charging stations** with different power supply modes. Evidence 4 The publicly available charging stations include a 12-pulse rectifier charger and an isolated DC DC converter to charge the individual batteriesIt is equivalent to the disclosure of the power distribution system, including multi-pulse rectifier loops and DC DC power supplies installed on powered equipment; Among them, the 12-pulse rectifier charger discloses that it includes a transformer and a full-wave rectifier circuit, and it is connected to the DC DC converter through the DC bus DC510V, and discloses that "the multi-pulse rectifier circuit is connected to the DC DC power supply through the DC transmission line".
According to claim 1, it can be seen that the technical problem to be solved by the patent in question is to overcome the problems of high transmission line loss, high cost of configuring AC UPS, and large system harmonics in the prior art. Evidence 4 can also solve the same technical problems as the patent in question, reduce the transmission line loss, etc., and obtain the same beneficial effect as the present patent.
Therefore, all the technical features of claim 1 of the patent in question are disclosed by evidence 4, and both belong to the same technical field, adopt the same technical means, solve the same technical problems, and obtain the same technical effects. Therefore, claim 1 does not possess novelty under Article 22(2) of the Patent Law with respect to evidence 4.
However, since claim 1 does not have novelty relative to evidence 4, it can be seen that claim 1 does not possess an inventive step as provided for in Article 22.3 of the Patent Law.