Recently, our Office received Decision No. 1354 (Year 2010)issued by the Beijing Municipal High People’s Court, in which the initial decision was maintained. The concerned case was rather complicated and the focus in disputation lies in so many issues as whether or not the amendments go beyond the scope of the disclosure as contained in the initial application, whether or not the invention complies with the definition concerning “an invention” as set forth in the Patent Law, whether or not the claims are clear, and whether or not the independent claim lacks the essential technical features. In regard of said issues, the Beijing Municipal High People’s Court made a further investigation attended by both parties after a hearing was held. During the trial, attorneys from our office explained specifically the difference between the process claim of the concerned case and the apparatus related to in the reference by keeping to the facts, the Patent Law and the relevant regulations thereof. The court finally accepted the views from our side. The benefits on behalf of our client were properly defended by the success made in the concerned case, which success further enhances the belief in our office from our client.