Amendment of the Claims Before the International Bureau

Basis Article 19 (1)



In the International Bureau of WIPO


Applicant(s)   :  Lin Zhen-man                          )


Application No.   PCT/SG03/00145                       )  file a brief statement


Filed         :  12 June 2003                           )  


For          :    Surface Treatment of SARS¨CInfected Lungs    


Patent Cooperation Treaty                                cc:  Austrian Patent Office

International Bureau of Wipo                             Fax :  43 1 534 24 733

34 Chemin Des Colombettes                             

1211 GENEVA 20 SWITZERLAND                       cc.  Per Designated Office


Authorized officer:


Applicant brief statement for AU search report


1.     The search authority of Austrian Patent Office was wrong in refusing to search the mailing date on Oct.20, 2003.


2.    Therefore, inventor basis on the Article 19 & 34 of PCT law to change the claims, description and the drawings on Dec.12, 2003, the amendment claims are divided into two different editions: Claims A was used for medicine patent by patent-law of country only while Claim B was use for medicine and methods of medical treatment patent by patent-law of country, for instance US patent office and so on.


3.    The AU search authority to rectify the wrong and gotten searches report on Apr.05, 2004.


4.    But, the AU searches report does not searches report for applicant¡¯s amendment claim A only was wrong continually.


5.     The AU searches report had crookedness three documents and which were a blind states at PCT/ISA/210 shown¡° the certain claims were found unreachable¡±. The search authority obviously has to impact fair examine and violate the Rule 33 of PCT law, below:


a.     The first document US6242472 title¡°Methods for the pulmonary delivery of biological agents¡±was shown the medical methods of patent un-involve above claim A and different field for patent and only involve PFC of claim B;


b.     The second document was not disclosure on the public anywhere in the world, so the report must be obtained in the text that is approved as submitted by the applicant on PCT Form, because the website master had private copyright! In further, why the AU search authority whom could be to forgot the Background of the invention had state, the description of invent was also forwarded to ¡°WHO-Padey¡±, ¡°WHO-Liden¡± by Mey-Verme, Mrs Cnia (WDC) and the leaders WHO were holding the Geneva meeting on 20 May 2003, the International Filing date could be to extend by the patent law naturally;


c.       The Apply No.DE10000823A1 was the third document, the title¡°Bring in the yonder gas to eliminate malignant-flu¡±(translation) shown the subject matter was the gas£¡The abstract¡°The invention involves an appliance to bringing of a gas into a malignant-flu¡¯s, into a Flus-Tissue of crowd diseases, or a Germany-flu¡­¡±(translation), it goes without saying, this case was not involve above applicant¡¯s claims in whichever point of view.  




      Under the PCT Article 15 the search authority shall be the subject of international search, to go a step further, under the PCT Article 17(2)(a)(1) that the international application relates to a subject matter which the International Searching Authority is not required to search for the unallied subject matter, the search authority of Austrian Patent Office was wrong for above three document.


Under the PCT Rule 33¡°relevant Prior Art for the International Search¡±had stipulated, the relevant Prior Art for the International Search must to the public anywhere in the world by means of written disclosure¡­ the search authority must to know the search report does not search into the unlawful recognition and controversial issue of personal website, as above the second document.


The search authority of Austrian Patent Office was once again wrong to made applicant difficult for this application, the ¡°the certain claims were found unreachable¡± of state of PCT/ISA/210 was outstanding Misrepresentution Ordinance, but, just the opposite, the AU search authority was to play the role of a travesty role to irrefutable evidence for this invention was not any relevant to Prior Art for the International Search!



                                                                                       Respectfully submitted,



Apr.20, 2004                                                                  ____________________________

In the International Bureau of WIPO                            PCT/SG03/00145 Applicant

Fax: 41 22 338 7140


SG ID S2665604D

Application address:

10 Ava Road Ava Tower

                                                         # 19-07  329949


Tel: 65 63533647 Fax: 65 6258563