[Article / Chinese Patents] Support requirements for numerical-range limitations in China (Chunfeng Hu and Jun Lin, Patent, September 2025)
更新日：3 時間前
Article information
Article type: Publication review
Categories: China
Main topics: Support requirement / Numerical limitations and parameters
First published on this website: October 1, 2026
Display and classification checked: October 1, 2026 (not a revalidation of the legal analysis)
[Article / Chinese Patents] Support requirements for numerical-range limitations in China (Chunfeng Hu and Jun Lin, Patent, September 2025)
<Supreme People's Court of China, (2020) 最高法知行終407>
1. Consideration of the Supreme Court judgment
Patent: A numerically limited invention combining charge cut-off voltage (over 4.2 V up to 5.8 V) and positive/negative electrode ratio (1:1.0–1:2.5).
Issue: The specification stated that properties deteriorate when parameters exceed the ranges. Apple argued that the claims included ranges not covered by the examples (ranges unable to achieve the invention's purpose), thus failing the support requirement.
First instance: The patent was held invalid because the claims included ranges expressly excluded by the specification and the generalization was too broad.
Supreme Court (reversal in the patentee's favour)
[English translation of the quotation]
“If a person skilled in the art, upon reading the specification, can identify corresponding relationships between the technical features of the respective numerical ranges, obtain embodiments meeting the invention's purpose through a limited number of experiments, and exclude inventions unable to achieve that purpose without excessive effort, the claim should be judged supported by the specification.”
2. Practical points
Based on this judgment, the following measures are proposed for Chinese specification drafting and invalidation proceedings.
① Drafting
Layer independent claims: Consider readily understandable structures, such as separate independent claims for each numerical group reliably producing the effect (groups of example data), alongside claims covering broad ranges.
② Placement of examples
Under the Examination Guidelines, the basic approach is to cover specific data at the range's starting, ending and intermediate values.
③ Invalidation proceedings
Merely arguing that some ranges cannot achieve the invention's purpose is insufficient.
More specific experimental results must establish that, even following the specification's guidance, a skilled person cannot identify the protected scope (the range producing the effect) with ordinary effort.
3. Conclusion
The Supreme Court presented a new support standard for numerical ranges: Can a skilled person exclude non-working ranges without excessive effort?
It can therefore be said that even broad numerical limitations are more likely to survive if the specification provides appropriate guidance.
Original article: https://lnkd.in/gTVcaP-d
Related articles
Updates and corrections
Substantive corrections and additions are recorded separately from classification, related links and display changes.
October 1, 2026: First publication of the author's original LinkedIn text on this website. Article type, categories, topic tags, sources and consultation navigation added.
2026-10-01 | Display maintenance: added case references stated in the original or language-alternate metadata; not a revalidation of legal analysis.
2026-10-01 | Name notation: replaced verified Japanese-script personal names with Roman-letter forms in this English article and its navigation. Legal analysis and original publication date unchanged.
2026-10-01 | Name notation: changed Hu Chunfeng and Lin Jun to the verified Roman-letter forms Chunfeng Hu and Jun Lin in the English text and navigation. Names verified against their 2015 coauthored Patent article and the JPAA English contents. No change to legal analysis.
