Page 7 - 2020 Policy Watch-Comparison of Secret Sale Patent
P. 7
The American Chamber of Commerce in South China
PHhealsrimnns. HUeSaAlt,hIcnacr.e S.A. v. Teva HTeevlsainPnhaHremaslt.hUcSaAre, ISn.Ac..案诉
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 美国联邦巡回上诉法院认定，根据35 U.S.C.S. §
Circuit properly found that a Swiss pharmaceutical 102(a)(1) 中对于“销售阻却”的规定，禁止一
company was prohibited by the “on sale” bar in 35 家瑞士制药公司的一种用于治疗由化疗引起的恶
U.S.C.S. § 102(a)(1) from obtaining a U.S. patent on 心和呕吐的药物申请美国专利，理由是该公司与
a drug that treated chemotherapy-induced nausea and 一家美国明尼苏达州制药公司签订了一份许可协
vomiting because it had entered into a license agree- 议及一份供应购买协议，在申请美国专利前已在
ment and a supply and purchase agreement with a 美国销售该药物超过一年。虽然该瑞士公司与明
Minnesota pharmaceutical company to sell the drug in 尼苏达州公司并未公开药物中所含有效成分的剂
the United States more than a year before it applied for 量，但他们公开了上述两份合同，并认为，根据
a U.S. patent. Although the Swiss company and the § 102(a)(1)对于药物申请专利的认定规定，这一
Minnesota company did not disclose the dosage of the 行为构成专利的“现有技术”。
active ingredient that was in the drug, they disclosed
the existence of both agreements, and that disclosure 《莱希史密斯美国发明法案(“AIA”)》禁止任
qualified as “prior art” under § 102(a)(1) for purposes 何人在其主张的发明的有效申请日期前已被公众
of determining the patentability of the drug. 使用的、在售的、或其他已向公众公开的发明
The Leahy-Smith American Invents Act (“AIA”) pre- 获授专利权，理由是该等行为构成技术方案公
cludes a person from obtaining a patent on an inven- 开并因此造成专利申请缺乏新颖性（35 U. S. C.
tion that was in public use, on sale, or otherwise avail- §102(a)(1)）1。
able to the public before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention. The reason is that these actions con-
stitute disclosure of technical solution and thus cause
the patent application to have a lack of novelty (35 U.
S. C. §102(a)(1))1 .
1 35 U.S.C.S. § 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty 1 35 U.S.C.S. § 102专利性条件；新颖性
(a)Novelty; Prior Art.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless （a）新颖性；现有技术——任何人可获得专利，除非（1）
(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed 被主张发明的有效申请日前已经获得专利的、在印刷出版
publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the 物中被描述过的、或已被公众使用的、在售的、或其他已
public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or 向公众公开；或（2）被主张发明已记载于根据第151节授予
(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed 的专利，或根据section 122(b)已发表的或被认为已发表的专
publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the 利申请书，该专利或申请在另一发明者名下且在被主张发
public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or 明的有效申请日前已有效提交申请。
(2)the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under
section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed 7
published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application,
as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
PHhealsrimnns. HUeSaAlt,hIcnacr.e S.A. v. Teva HTeevlsainPnhaHremaslt.hUcSaAre, ISn.Ac..案诉
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 美国联邦巡回上诉法院认定，根据35 U.S.C.S. §
Circuit properly found that a Swiss pharmaceutical 102(a)(1) 中对于“销售阻却”的规定，禁止一
company was prohibited by the “on sale” bar in 35 家瑞士制药公司的一种用于治疗由化疗引起的恶
U.S.C.S. § 102(a)(1) from obtaining a U.S. patent on 心和呕吐的药物申请美国专利，理由是该公司与
a drug that treated chemotherapy-induced nausea and 一家美国明尼苏达州制药公司签订了一份许可协
vomiting because it had entered into a license agree- 议及一份供应购买协议，在申请美国专利前已在
ment and a supply and purchase agreement with a 美国销售该药物超过一年。虽然该瑞士公司与明
Minnesota pharmaceutical company to sell the drug in 尼苏达州公司并未公开药物中所含有效成分的剂
the United States more than a year before it applied for 量，但他们公开了上述两份合同，并认为，根据
a U.S. patent. Although the Swiss company and the § 102(a)(1)对于药物申请专利的认定规定，这一
Minnesota company did not disclose the dosage of the 行为构成专利的“现有技术”。
active ingredient that was in the drug, they disclosed
the existence of both agreements, and that disclosure 《莱希史密斯美国发明法案(“AIA”)》禁止任
qualified as “prior art” under § 102(a)(1) for purposes 何人在其主张的发明的有效申请日期前已被公众
of determining the patentability of the drug. 使用的、在售的、或其他已向公众公开的发明
The Leahy-Smith American Invents Act (“AIA”) pre- 获授专利权，理由是该等行为构成技术方案公
cludes a person from obtaining a patent on an inven- 开并因此造成专利申请缺乏新颖性（35 U. S. C.
tion that was in public use, on sale, or otherwise avail- §102(a)(1)）1。
able to the public before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention. The reason is that these actions con-
stitute disclosure of technical solution and thus cause
the patent application to have a lack of novelty (35 U.
S. C. §102(a)(1))1 .
1 35 U.S.C.S. § 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty 1 35 U.S.C.S. § 102专利性条件；新颖性
(a)Novelty; Prior Art.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless （a）新颖性；现有技术——任何人可获得专利，除非（1）
(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed 被主张发明的有效申请日前已经获得专利的、在印刷出版
publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the 物中被描述过的、或已被公众使用的、在售的、或其他已
public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or 向公众公开；或（2）被主张发明已记载于根据第151节授予
(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed 的专利，或根据section 122(b)已发表的或被认为已发表的专
publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the 利申请书，该专利或申请在另一发明者名下且在被主张发
public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or 明的有效申请日前已有效提交申请。
(2)the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under
section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed 7
published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application,
as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
