5 X conceived an invention about the improvement of air duct of a hair dryer. Y didn’t contribute to the 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 and marketing of the hair dryers embedded with the aforesaid conception. The aforesaid hair dryers made by Z were put on the market on May 20, 2018. On July 5, 2018, X filed a patent application for the aforesaid conception with Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). Unexpectedly, it was found that W actually has filed another patent application in accordance with the identical conception that came from W’s independent invention, on June 5, 2018, and requested the publication on June 20, 2018. If you were an examiner employed by TIPO, which of the following statements 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 the grace 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 interest of 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 published the patent application, based upon the same invention, respectively, on June 5 and 20, 2018.