{"id":1211,"date":"2016-11-10T14:02:20","date_gmt":"2016-11-10T13:02:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/?p=1211"},"modified":"2016-11-10T14:03:00","modified_gmt":"2016-11-10T13:03:00","slug":"prosecution-history-and-the-doctrine-of-equivalence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/prosecution-history-and-the-doctrine-of-equivalence\/","title":{"rendered":"Prosecution history and the doctrine of equivalence"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Federal Supreme Court has issued a new decision (BGH X ZR 29\/15 ) on the subject of equivalent patent infringement.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>The principles of the decision are the following:<\/p>\n<p>a) A patent infringement with equivalent means in general has to be negated if the specification reveals several possibilities of achieving a certain technical result, however only one possibility was added to the patent claim.<\/p>\n<p>b) For the applicability of this principle it is not sufficient that the claimed embodiment is based on information in the specification or for other reasons on s a specific application of a more general principle of the solution and due to these findings the person skilled in the art was not able to find further embodiments according to this solution principle.<\/p>\n<p>c) It is admissible to use statements of the applicant made during the granting procedure as indication how a person skilled in the art understands the subject-matter of the patent. The same applies with respect to the statements made by the examiner. Nevertheless, those indications cannot simply be used as sole basis for the interpretation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Federal Supreme Court has issued a new decision (BGH X ZR 29\/15 ) on the subject of equivalent patent infringement.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":944,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1211","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1211","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1211"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1211\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1213,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1211\/revisions\/1213"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/944"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1211"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1211"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.dreiss.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1211"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}