隨著科技之進步，智慧財產訴訟，特別是專利案件，常涉及跨領域之技術專業問題，我國智慧財產專業法院參考外國法制後引進技術審查官之制度，提升專業法庭程序運作主體之法律外專業知能，如何使技術審查官能發揮最大功效係為十分重要的課題。技術審查官乃熟習專利知識之專業技術人員，輔助法官於專利訴訟中進行相關技術問題之判斷，技術資料之蒐集、分析及提供技術之意見，並依法參與訴訟程序。然而，技術審查官制度運作於我國智慧財產訴訟程序之現行規定仍有許多爭議。例如，技術審查官之技術報告一律不公開是否合適，法院不公開心證有無改革必要，技術審查官與法官見解不一致如何處理，技術審查官迴避制度等問題，本文透過比較法學研究、法理探討及檢視司法實踐之情形，俾以瞭解審理新制之設計是否確已解決既往訴訟缺失，檢視相關爭議問題並嘗試提出可能配套措施之建議，最後就技術審查官制度在我國智慧財產訴訟之運作提出結論與建議，以期對於智慧財產權之保護更加周延，法制更加完備。 / With the advancement of science and technology, intellectual property litigation often involving interdisciplinary issues of technical expertise, particularly patent cases. The Intellectual Property Court has referenced the legal systems of various nations and set up the technical examination officer. To promote technical expertise of the court, and to maximize the effectiveness of the technical examination officer is a very important issue. The technical examination officers assist judges to judge the relevant technical issues, gather technical information, analyze and sort the arguments based on the expertise in order to clarify the issues, and furnish references pertaining to patent and technical specialty in patent litigation. However, there are many controversies about the institution of technical examination officer in intellectual property litigation in Taiwan. For example, the technical examination officer non-disclosure of technical reports, the court non-disclosure of moral conviction, legal opinion differences between the technical examination officer and the court, and the technical examination officer shall not perform the duties if there is any legal recusal cause in the case.The research based on the study of comparative method, jurisprudential inquiry, judicial verdicts reviews the intellectual property court and the controversies in practical operation of the technical examination officer system.Finally, the article presents possible proposal for dealing with controversies of the technical examination officer on the performance of Intellectual Property Court after the implementation of Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act to provide informative reference for further legal research and patent practice.