SIPO published “Draft Amendment of Patent Examination Guidelines (draft for comments)” on October 28, and the public may send written comments and suggestions to the Department of Treaty and Law of SIPO (tiaofasi@sipo.gov.cn) before November 27, 2016. The draft amendment mainly relates the following issues.

1. If a claim relating to business model comprises both contents about business rules and methods and technical features, such claim shall not be regarded as belonging to unpatentable subject matters according to Article 25 of the Patent Law.

2. Further clarify the difference between “computer program per se” and “invention relating to computer program”. Claims may be drafted in the manner “medium + computer program process”.

3. Clarify that components of a device claim may comprise programs.

4. Amend “functional module” to “program module”.

5. When determining whether the description conforms to the adequate disclosure requirement, the provision “Embodiments and experimental data filed after the application date shall not be taken into consideration” is amended to “The examiner shall examine experimental data filed after the application date. The technical effect proven by such later filed experimental data shall be obtainable by a person skilled in the art based on the contents in the patent application publication”.

6. More ways for amendment to patent documents are open in the examination of request for invalidation; it is now allowed to narrow protection scope of a claim by adding one or more technical features of other claims to the claim and to amend obvious errors in a claim.

7. Considering the above newly available ways for amendment to patent documents in the examination of request for invalidation, the invalidation petitioner is allowed to add invalidation reasons regarding the amendment and detailed explanation within the time limit prescribed by the Patent Reexamination Board.

8. Extend the documents available for public access and copying to those in the substantive examination procedure, including notifications, search reports and decisions sent to the applicant.

9. Make adaptive amendment to provisions about the suspension procedure. Where the suspension procedure is conducted because the people's court requires the Patent Office to assist in the execution of property preservation, the Patent Office shall suspend the related procedure according to the property preservation period specified in the Notification of Civil Ruling and Notification of Assistance in Enforcement. Where the people's court requires continued preservation of property after termination of the suspension period, the Notification of Assistance in Enforcement for continued preservation shall arrive at the Patent Office before termination of the time limit, and the Patent Office shall extend the suspension period after verifying that such Notification complies with the related provisions.

(Source: Source: official website of SIPO)