The Email record of applicant between

 The Austrian Patent Office

Oct.05-28, 2003 


Dear Walter T.


        Applicant can not agree the wrong viewpoint of the search on international application.


       Because your examiner and legal experts was opposing and that them can not to enumerated

 for that specific reason! 


       Please in view the claims of international application:


1.    The main characteristic of the “Surface Treatment of SARS–Infected Lungs” is

      to inject sterilizing liquid into the lung lobes.

2.   The formal name for the medicine of sterilizing liquid is Per Fluoro Chemicals

 (PFC) adding ozone forming a medicine.

3.   Including any other lung diseases and SARS inflammation.

4.     To add antibiotics or other bactericide into the sterilizing liquid to suppress

         or to kill the virus.


      It is obvious, that the claims of subject is a liquid-medicine, the medicine by PFC and O3 mixed

 together.  Your examiner and legal experts were argueing irrationally.


      In the US patent law, the methods for treatment of the human can be accepted, therefore, in the

application of future in US, applicant will have to add the claim of medical method for cure cancer,

the medical method is  “freeze-therapy”,  please see the Discussion 3 & 4 of in the Description.


    If the other countries of patent examination have viewed additionally for the power requirement

 concerning applicant's claims, that can also still modify too, therefore, your examiner and legal

experts are extra to worry.  You must give me the search report immediately!


      On the other hand, a human rights record reflecting the country is influensia your decision, my

invention helps them to cure SARS but they did not thank me and still make things difficult for me!


Please to see the previews records in my websites stated below and to help me!






Letter to WHO

Apr.17, 2003


Surface Treatment of SARS-Infected Lungs

May.20, 2003


Letter to WHO

May.20, 2003


Yours faithfully,


applicant : Lin Zhen Man


Oct.28, 2003     


Walter.Tomaschitz@patent.    To:  Kam Tack CHIG/IPOS/SINGOV@SINGOV                                         

attached yo will find the checked rexamined statement by senior examer
Cert.Eng. Karl Wolf:

His finding is that Rule 39.1 (IV) is indeed applicable in this case as the subject matter for which protection is being sought is a therapy of the human body and not as the applicant contends a method of diagnosis!

The previous finding therefore holds good!

Inform the applicant and the officer whose concern this application is, please!

Best regards,

Statement of Mr. Wolf:
Regel 39.1 (iv) PCT ist richtig und besagt

 "No International Searching Authority shall be required to search an international application if, and to the extent to which, its subject matter concerns a method for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy as well as diagnostic methods".

Im vorliegenden Fall handelt es sich nicht - wie der Anmelder darlegt – um ein Diagnostizierverfahren, sondern um ein Therapieverfahren  (therapeutische Behandlung des menschlichen Körpers).

 Mit besten Grüßen


Subject: LZM  Patent  Office
 23/10/2003 12:25                 

----- Original Message -----

From: Tomaschitz Walter Mag.

To: ycec

Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 5:03 PM

Subject: AW: applicant inquired the search report again one time!

Dear Lin Zhen Man,

Your letter will be forwarded to both the examiner and our legal experts with due dispatch.

Best regards,

Walter T.

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: ycec []
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Oktober 2003 14:46
An: Tomaschitz Walter Mag.;
Cc: ~x???`~ _17_
Betreff: Fw: applicant inquired the search report again one time!

Austrian Patent Office

Service and Information Center

(Division Manager)


Mag. Walter Tomaschitz;


  Thank you for your reply today! I believed that my application of search report had exceeded 3 months,as it is impatient that please excuse me !


In view of Rule 39. 1 (IV): 

 (iv) methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy, as well as  diagnostic methods,


            The Rule restrict is diagnostic method only, but that my PCT application of  subject matter is put into a kind of medicine of lung, thus it is not a diagnostic method, reference the Rule 39. 1 (IV) is wrong.   


The patent of application is a medicine for the patient’s lung, the medicine by PFC and O3 mix to become,applicant believed this is the first precedent on medical history, so the report must to make the proof the search without precedent.   


Wait your report, thank you! 


applicant : Lin Zhen Man


Oct.22, 2003


-----Original Message-----

From: : Tomaschitz Walter Mag.


Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 5:11 PM

Subject: WG: applicant inquired the search report again one time!



regarding application no PCT/SG03/00145 I would like to apprise you of the following:

a)       as to the time allowed: According to Rule 42 PCT the time limit in which an international

   search report shall be made available is three months as of receipt of the search copy by the

   international search authority. The time limit, viz. the 2 to 4 weeks mentioned by the

   applicant, is likely to be the time limit striven for in cases of commercial searches in accord

with § 57 a Z 1 Austrian Patent Law;

b)       as to the subject matter of the application: The application in question relates to a process of

   therapeutic treatment of the human body whereby an insufficiently disclosed agent is

   injected into the lung of a patient. Recasting the patent claims in order to seek protection

   aimed at a second medical indication is not possible as the injection of the above agent into

   view of Rule 39. 1 (IV) an international search will therefore not be carried out.


Sincerely hoping the above affords the clarification you seek I remain,


Yours sincerely,

Mag. Walter Tomaschitz

(Division Manager)

Austrian Patent Office

Service and Information Center


Dresdner Strasse 87

A-1200 Vienna

Tel: +43 1 534 24-711

Fax: +43 1 534 24-733


--Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Weidinger Ingrid Dr. Im Auftrag von Info
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Oktober 2003 05:44
An: Czuba Helmut DI. Dr.; Tomaschitz Walter Mag.
Betreff: applicant inquired the search report again one time!

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: ycec []
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Oktober 2003 05:08
Betreff: applicant inquired the search report again one time!


Austrian Patent Office

Director General

Dear Sir,   

    As in applicant asked repeatedly that your service promise, you must manage immediately and do not despise! Because,  reply to applicant is basic of courtesy,  your behavior represents the dignity of your countryapplicant inquired the search report again one time!


applicant : Lin Zhen Man


Fax: 65 62585636    &  86 755 25550197

Email:    &

cc.      receiving office

dd.      Intellectual Property Office of Singapore

ee.      Registry of Patents

ff.        Miss Tan Kar-Leng

LZM  Patent  Office

10 Ava Road Ava Tower # 19-07 Singapore 329949  ( )

Tel: 65 63533647 Fax: 65 62585636    Email:

Austrian Patent Office


Dresdnerstrasse 87

A-1200 Vienna


                                                                   Urgent!     Oct.13, 2003 

To: Dept.-in-charge                                                  The 3rd Fax: 43 1 53424 520

43 1 53424 110

43 1 53424 535



 I am an applicant of PCT/SG03/00145, the title of invention is "Surface Treatment of SARS-infected Lungs", with the receiving Office is Singapore patent Office and the international filling date on 12 Jun 2003.


 About the application of PCT/SG03/00145, I had designated Austrian Patent Office to complete search report and had already paid the cost needed to Singapore patent Office.   


  I have repeatedly urge you all to complete the search report about the application that was sent via the receiving Office Singapore patent Office, but have yet to receive any reply for the passed 3 months.   


Today, I had to find a service promise on your websites that stated  "Search on the state of the art concerning a concrete technical problem within 2 - 4 weeks. "  Therefore, i would like to know what had caused that delay in getting the search report? 


Thank you very much for your attention and please handle this matter as soon as possible.

Yours faithfully, 

applicant : Lin Zhen Man

10 Ava Road, Ava Tower, # 19-07

Singapore 329949

Oct.05, 2003