However, when the equivalent scope of a patent is interpreted, the trust of the public on the supplements, amendments, corrections, petitions, and arguments about the specification made by the patentee during the patent prosecution and then the maintenance of the patent right has to be protected. If a patentee limits the claims or excludes something from the claims for purposes of meeting patentability requirements in the above-mentioned proceedings, it is necessary to apply the doctrine of file-wrapper estoppel to limiting the equivalent scope of the patent right. However, a patentee may file a patent application for the same invention in different countries. Because of the differences of the examination systems and examining guidelines among different countries, the allowed patent scopes in different countries are not necessarily the same for the same invention. In addition, according to the doctrine of the territoriality of a patent right, the scopes of right enforcement of patents allowed in different countries can also be limited to the sovereign territory of each country that allows such a patent. The limitation on each patent right also depends on the situations of supplements, amendments, corrections, petitions, and arguments during the patent prosecution and patent maintenance in each country. As a result, it is groundless that the defendant recited the explanation of the response during the proceeding of allowing a patent in other country to limit the patent right allowed by our country.

Doctrine of file-wrapper estoppel, doctrine of the territoriality of a patent right