Appellant Ma XX and appellant Shenzhen Chow Tai Fook Online Media Co., LTD. (referred to as Chow Tai Fook Company), the first instance defendant Jingdong company infringement of trademark rights dispute

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded the trademark infringement dispute between the appellant Ma Mou and the appellee Shenzhen Chow Tai Fook Online Media Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Chow Tai Fook Company) and the first instance defendant Beijing Jingdong Sanbai Lu Shidu E-commerce Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Jingdong Company). It was found that the appellant Ma XX filed an infringement lawsuit against Chow Tai Fook Company for fair use of the trademark rights acquired in bad faith, which constituted an abuse of rights, so the appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld.

2022-05-30

See More

Patent case | Case of utility model patent infringement dispute between Dongguan Guangdistance Electronics Co., LTD and Ningbo Puneng Communication Equipment Co., LTD

The first instance told that the light distance company filed a lawsuit with the original trial court, and the original trial court accepted the case on November 27, 2020. Guang Distance Company sued to order Puneng Company: 1. Immediately stop manufacturing, selling, promising to sell products that infringe the patent rights involved; 2. Compensation for economic losses (including reasonable expenses) 800,000 yuan. The defendant of the first instance argued that the original trial of Panneng Company argued: the patentee involved is a Taiwan enterprise, the authenticity of the Patent licensing Agreement is not recognized, it is impossible to confirm whether the light distance company enjoys authorization when suing, and the light distance company is not the subject

2022-05-25

See More

vivo suffered trademark infringement some Tong some Di company production and sales of vivi brand mobile phone sales

The plaintiff of Weiwo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhen Upintong Electronic Technology Co., LTD., Shenzhen Huatang Disun Technology Co., LTD., v. Defendant Upintong Co., Ltd. used "vivi" as the trademark and "vivi" as the name of the mobile phone in its mobile phone products, Registered the website with the domain name "vivi-china.com" and advertised mobile phone products using "vivi" as the trademark and product name,

2022-05-24

See More

Invention patent disputes | Civil judgment of second instance of Zhongshan Yalesi Electric Appliance Industrial Co., LTD., Shenzhen Tuobang Co., LTD., infringement of invention patent rights

The appellant Zhongshan Yalesi Electric Appliance Industrial Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Yalesi Company) is not satisfied with the civil judgment (2016) No. 1238 of Guangdong 03 Minchu made by the Intermediate People's Court of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province on February 26, 2019, due to the invention patent infringement dispute with the appellant Shenzhen Topang Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Topang Company). Appeal to this court. After the filing of the case on July 2, 2019, the court formed a panel in accordance with the law, and tried the case in public on August 7, 2019. The appellant Yalesi Company appointed an agent AD litre Chen Wei, and the appellant Tuopang Company appointed an agent AD litre Yi Zhao to attend the court. The case is now closed.

2022-05-18

See More

Huawei vs. Samsung Administrative Dispute over patent invalidity of Invention: "Method and device for sending and receiving control Information for randomizing Intercell interference in a mobile communication system"

Huawei vs Samsung 5G dispute case summary Involved in the patent (patent No. 200880007435.1) the name of the invention patent (referred to as the patent), applied on January 7, 2008 (the earliest priority date is January 5, 2007), authorized notice on July 23, 2014, The patent holder is Samsung Electronics Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Samsung Corporation). Huawei Technologies Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Huawei) filed a request for invalidation of the patent with the Patent Reexamination Board of the former State Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Reexamination Board) on September 2, 2016.

2022-05-17

See More

The second instance adjudicated compensation of 750,000 yuan in the dispute over unfair competition of trademark |

In recent years, there have been a number of "Tiger Square Bridge Jing Tian red fried cake" stores on the market, who is the legitimate right subject of "Jing Tian Red" brand? The Beijing Intellectual Property Court recently concluded a dispute over unfair competition involving the brand rights of "Beijing Tianhong".

2022-05-16

See More

Red Bull trademark case new judgment: Reignwood three defendants were awarded more than 200 million yuan in the first instance

There have been new developments in the dispute between Red Bull Thailand and Reignwood Red Bull. Recently, the Tianhe District People's Court of Guangzhou...

2022-05-14

See More

China Resources (Group) Co., LTD., China Resources Intellectual Property Management Co., Ltd. and other trademark infringement disputes civil retrial judgment

Retrial of the applicant China Resources (Group) Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as China Resources Group) and China Resources Intellectual Property Management Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as China Resources Intellectual Property Company) for trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes with the respondent China Resources Lighting Store (hereinafter referred to as China Resources Store) in Jinniu District, Chengdu, If you are not satisfied with the civil judgment No. 174 of Sichuan Higher People's Court (2020), apply to the court for a retrial.

2022-04-21

See More

Us Steel and Baosteel 337 investigation

In May 2016, more than 40 Chinese steel companies, such as Baosteel and Shougang, launched a 337 investigation against carbon steel and alloy steel imported from China to the United States. From anti-monopoly, infringement of trade secrets, fictitious origin and other three aspects of the Chinese steel enterprises accused.

2021-08-31

See More

Zhuhai Nastar Company and other responding to the case of "337 investigation" ink cartridges

On February 27, 2006, Epson filed a "337 investigation" application for several ink cartridge manufacturers, including Chinese enterprises, and then, on August 1 of the same year, when Epson's "337 investigation" case had not yet appeared, HP also filed a "337 investigation" application for three companies affiliated with Nastar Group.

2021-08-31

See More
< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >
5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Head Office13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

Head Office

13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Subsidiary Company2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

Subsidiary Company

2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

图片名称

Service Number

订阅号.jpg

Subscription Number


Copyright ©2016 Shenzhen Shenkexin patent Agency Co., LTD All rights reserved | 粤ICP备2021174526号

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有 | 粤ICP备2021174526号 SEO标签

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有

粤ICP备2021174526号