In short
Refusal of a patent application is the decision by which the institution did not tie the application to registration. A path is not chosen before the ground is read. A writing that asks a deficiency to be completed and a refusal are not the same paper. An objection day is not in this article. The decision shows for which claims it was given on the application on the register. There is no promise of acceptance.
The ground line
Novelty, inventive step, uncertainty of the claims and the description not carrying the claim are frequent headings of a ground. Novelty and inventive step are not the same sentence. If the decision writes one of these headings, the heading that was written is read. If it does not write one, the ground is not chosen later. If there is more than one ground, each is tied to its own claim. If the link is not visible, all the claims are not treated as refused for the same reason.
The application papers consist of the description, the claims and the drawings. The refusal should say which part of these papers it rested on. If it does not say so, what is missing is not the result. It is the face of the ground. The petition marks which claim was refused by which sentence. If there is no mark, the objection stays general. An objection that stays general does not stand in for the text of the decision.
A deficiency writing is not a refusal
The institution may have sent a separate writing, during the application, for missing papers or for an uncertain claim. That writing is not a refusal decision. If the deficiency was cured, the text that was cured stands in the file. If it was not cured, the refusal may be resting on that deficiency. Whether it rests on it is read from the refusal decision's own sentence. Service shows which writing reached on which date. If there is no date, time is not treated as having started to run by itself. A number for the time is not in this article.
How the application is formed stands in a patent application. The application procedure does not change the ground of refusal. Insisting with the same text may strike the same wall again. Narrowing the claims is discussed in some files. Not every refusal closes by adding a sentence. If the added sentence has no support in the description, it may be read like a new invention. Support is not built before the description and the claim come side by side.
How the decision is read
The ground of refusal is placed side by side with the decision that was served and with the claims. The ground being written heavily does not mean the application is invalid by itself. The address of a Çankaya office does not change the institution that gave the decision or the competent authority. The authority is read from the heading of the decision and from the register record.
The path inside the institution and the action
An objection inside the institution, or a re-examination, depends on the decision that was served. Which path is open is read from the decision's own text. If the text is silent, the path is not chosen from memory. The door of the court does not open at the same time, in every file, before the path inside the institution ends. An action against an institution decision discusses this separation. The petition of the action should show which sentence of the institution decision it was brought against. If it does not show that, the action complains of the whole of the decision in general, and the ground is lost.
A utility model or a trade secret may be discussed separately in some files. The refusal decision is not treated as having opened that path by itself. A printout of the register shows the outcome of the application. If there is no printout, an oral news of refusal does not stand in for a document. The document is built from a copy of the decision and from the service envelope.
The separation from invalidity
Invalidity is the later debate of a patent that was registered. The separation stands in patent invalidity. At the refusal stage there is no registration certificate. When there is no registration, the language of invalidity turns the refusal file into another action. The turning does not happen without reading the claims and the ground.
If the decision is a partial refusal, the claim that remains standing and the claim that was refused are separated. If the separation does not appear on the register, a partial refusal is not assumed. A trademark refusal is not the same procedure either. A patent claim is not read like a trademark class. Two refusals ask for two separate petitions. The same sentence is not pasted onto both files.
On a partial refusal, the claim that remains standing does not have to carry the ground of the claim that was refused. Whether it carries it is read from the sentence of the decision. If there is no sentence, a partial refusal is not assumed. A part that is not assumed is not treated as entered on the register either. If it was entered, the copy of the register and the copy of the decision are compared. The outcome is not said before the comparison is made.
Conclusion
Refusal of a patent application is read from the ground and from the service. A deficiency writing is not a refusal decision. The ground and the claim are not counted as the same line. The frame is on the intellectual property page. There is no promise of a result.
The basis is Industrial Property Law No. 6769.