5 X conceived an invention about the improvement of air duct of a hair dryer. Y didn’t contribute tothe aforesaid conception but served as an assistant for X’s administrative affairs. On May 5, 2018,without X’s consent, Y sold the aforesaid conception on the hair dryer to Z for manufacture andmarketing of the hair dryers embedded with the aforesaid conception. The aforesaid hair dryersmade by Z were put on the market on May 20, 2018. On July 5, 2018, X filed a patent applicationfor the aforesaid conception with Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). Unexpectedly, itwas found that W actually has filed another patent application in accordance with the identicalconception that came from W’s independent invention, on June 5, 2018, and requested thepublication on June 20, 2018. If you were an examiner employed by TIPO, which of the followingstatements is in accord with Taiwan Patent Act?
(A) X and Y are the joint inventors on the aforesaid invention.
(B) The novel requirement of X’s patent application may be satisfied since the filing is within thegrace period under Article 22 of Taiwan Patent Act.
(C) The novel requirement of X’s patent application may be satisfied since X may enjoy the interestof priority to deem the filing date as May 5, 2018.
(D) The novel requirement of X’s patent application may be failed since W has filed and publishedthe patent application, based upon the same invention, respectively, on June 5 and 20, 2018.