China National Knowledge Bureau releases 2022 Intellectual Property administrative protection typical cases!

On April 26, the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) released the typical cases of intellectual property administrative protection in 2022. After local recommendation, online voting and expert review, a total of 30 typical cases of intellectual property administrative protection in 2022 were finally determined and released during the Intellectual Property Open Day of the National Intellectual Property Publicity Week.

Typical cases of intellectual property administrative protection in 2022 were released

In order to thoroughly implement the decision-making and deployment of the Party Central Committee and The State Council on comprehensively strengthening intellectual property protection, improve the quality and efficiency of handling intellectual property administrative protection cases, effectively deter intellectual property infringement and illegal acts, and actively create a good innovation environment and business environment, the State Intellectual Property Office organized the selection of typical cases of intellectual property administrative protection in 2022. After local recommendation, online voting and expert review, a total of 30 typical cases of intellectual property administrative protection in 2022 were finally determined and released during the Intellectual Property Open Day of the National Intellectual Property Publicity Week.

Among them, 10 cases of patent administrative protection. The cases cover inventions, utility models and designs, involving administrative rulings on patent infringement disputes, and investigation and punishment of counterfeit patents. Covering medicine, food, environmental protection and other fields.

10 trademark administrative protection cases. The cases cover goods and service marks, including many cases of infringement of well-known trademarks; It covers medicine, food, clothing, daily chemicals, manufacturing and other fields, and involves new fields and new forms of business such as network broadcast, mobile phone applications, and e-commerce platforms.

There were 10 cases of protection of geographical indications, Olympic signs, special signs and official signs. Geographical indication cases cover geographical indication products and certification trademarks registered with geographical indication, including landmark products such as "West Lake Longjing"; The Olympic logo case involves "Bing Dwen Dwen" and "Olympic Five rings logo". Typical cases of special symbols include the emblem and mascot of the 31st World Universiade; Typical cases of official signs involve special signs for geographical indications.

These cases highlight the advantages of intellectual property administrative protection, cross-regional and cross-departmental law enforcement cooperation and rapid response, and have a high representation and strong influence on the intellectual property rights and protection of domestic and foreign right holders, focusing on the past year, China has comprehensively strengthened intellectual property protection, severely cracked down on intellectual property infringement, and escorted the development of major national activities and strategic emerging industries. We will continue to optimize the innovation and business environment and promote high-quality economic development.

1. The Intellectual Property Office of Jing County, Anhui Province handled the design patent infringement dispute case of "comb (2)"

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, Mr. Wang, is the patentee of the design patent named "Comb (2)", patent number ZL202130464274.7. It believes that a company in Jing County sold the accused infringing products on an e-commerce platform without permission, and submitted relevant evidence to the Jing County Intellectual Property Office.

On February 28, 2022, the Jing County Intellectual Property Office filed a case in accordance with the law. After hearing, the bureau believes that how to understand the "general consumer" is the problem that needs to be solved in the case, and requests the State Intellectual Property Office in this regard.

The consultation opinion issued by the State Intellectual Property Office pointed out that the purpose of setting the judgment subject of "general consumer" is to make the judgment of the similarity of design more unified, objective and reasonable, and avoid the judgment based on the knowledge level and cognitive ability of the specific judge. The "general consumer" is a fictitious judgment subject and a hypothetical "person". And it should have "common sense understanding", "discernment" and "knowledge" to make provisions. When judging whether the accused infringing product is similar to the design patent, the general consumer should be the main judge.

After receiving the advisory opinion, on April 26, 2022, the Jing County Intellectual Property Office made a ruling that the alleged infringing product fell within the scope of protection of the patent right and ordered the requested person to immediately stop the infringement.

【 Expert Comments 】

The typical part of this case is that the administrative adjudication of patent infringement disputes and other enforcement powers are delegated to the county level. In addition, the State Intellectual Property Office gave specific guidance, pointing out that the handling of cases should avoid making judgments based on the knowledge level and cognitive ability of specific judges. It is of great significance to guide the judgment of infringement of design.(Wu Jiaojun, Dean of School of Law, Hefei University of Technology)

2. Changsha City, Hunan Province Furong District Intellectual Property Office handled the "veterinary medicine bottle" utility model patent infringement dispute series

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, Hunan Lefudi Medical Packaging Material Technology Co., LTD., is the patentee of the utility model patent entitled "a kind of dual-use single handle easy folding cover for animal medicine", patent number ZL201920076353.8. The other claimant, Hunan Qianshan Pharmaceutical Machinery Co., Ltd. is the patentee of the utility model patent entitled "Composite tube cover", patent number ZL201320028054.X.

On October 28, 2022, the two claimants jointly submitted a request to the Intellectual Property Office of Furong District, Changsha City, Hunan Province, believing that the sales and promises of the relevant products of the requested Party were suspected of infringing its patent rights. The requested persons are a trading company limited in Changsha. The bureau filed the above cases separately and adopted the case handling mode of combined investigation and trial. During the trial of the case, Furong District Intellectual Property Office and Changsha Intellectual Property Protection Center jointly investigated and built a case handling mechanism that combined investigation and evidence collection with technical support.

After investigation, the Furong District Intellectual Property Office believes that the technical solution of the allegedly infringing product falls within the scope of protection of the patent right involved, and the requested person constitutes patent infringement. On November 30, 2022, the Bureau organized administrative mediation for two cases, one of which reached a settlement, and the relevant mediation agreement was completed by the Changsha Intermediate People's Court for judicial confirmation. On December 12, 2022, Furong District Intellectual Property Office made an administrative ruling on another case, ordering the requested person to immediately stop the infringement.

【 Expert Comments 】

This case is a combination of innovation in the handling mechanism and method of administrative adjudication cases: it adopts the innovative mode of filing cases separately and trying cases together, forming a joint force of administrative protection and judicial protection of intellectual property rights; Practice the pilot work of rapid handling of intellectual property disputes, and use the professional support of technical investigators.(Xiao Dongmei, Dean, Professor and doctoral Supervisor, School of Intellectual Property, Xiangtan University)

3. Guangdong Zhongshan Intellectual Property Office handled the patent infringement dispute of "copper wire auxiliary fixing clip" series of inventions

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, a company in Zhongshan, is the patentee of 10 invention patents named "a kind of T2 wound copper wire auxiliary fixing clip", patent number ZL201710330407.4, etc. The above 10 patents are legal and valid when the applicant files the infringement dispute handling request.

The Requested Party is the original employee of the Requestor. The Requestor believes that the Requested Party obtained the product drawings of the Requestor through illegal means, and the "automatic winding machine" manufactured and sold infringes its 10 invention patents and trade secrets. On May 17, 2022, the Requestor filed a request for administrative ruling on patent infringement disputes with Zhongshan Intellectual Property Office. And to Zhongshan City Public Security Bureau port branch filed a trade secret infringement complaint.

Zhongshan Intellectual Property Office filed 10 requests for administrative rulings on patent infringement disputes at the same time on May 17, 2022, and conducted a joint on-site investigation with the Port Branch of Zhongshan Public Security Bureau on the day of filing. In the field investigation, the case personnel preliminarily determined that the accused infringing product was suspected of infringing the patent right of the invention involved, and the requested person did not make a non-infringement defense. After consultation, the two parties agreed to settle the case through mediation.

On May 23, 2022, under the auspices of Zhongshan Intellectual Property Office, the two parties quickly reached a settlement on all cases and signed a mediation agreement on patent infringement disputes, agreeing that the requested party would compensate the claimant 1.6 million yuan and would no longer infringe the claimant's patent rights.

【 Expert Comments 】

The case established a multi-departmental coordination and cooperation pattern for the protection of intellectual property rights, in response to the two independent intellectual property processing requests made by the requestor, the intellectual property Office quickly launched a law enforcement linkage with the public security department. Strict law enforcement means and innovative case handling methods to ensure transparent and fair law enforcement of patent infringement.(An Xuemei, Professor, Guangdong University of Finance)

4. Jiangsu Intellectual Property Office handled the utility model patent infringement dispute case of "high-efficiency sintering furnace for battery materials with push-plate guided sliding function"

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, Suzhou Huike Electromechanical Equipment Co., LTD., is the patentee of the utility model patent entitled "High Efficiency sintering furnace for battery material with push-plate guided sliding function", patent number ZL201620358253.0.

The petitioner said that the requested Wuxi Zhonggong Thermal Control Technology Co., Ltd. recruited backbone technical personnel from its company to produce and sell the same push plate furnace products with the patented technology involved in the case to its customers, which seriously infringed its legitimate rights and interests. The respondent believes that the product is fundamentally different from the technical solution of the applicant's patent protection, and there is no infringement.

On July 22, 2019, the Intellectual Property Office of Jiangsu Province filed a case according to law. On September 30, after hearing that the technical features of the products involved fully covered all technical features of the patent claims 1, the bureau made an administrative ruling, finding that the products involved constituted infringement of the patents involved, and ordered the requested party to immediately stop the infringement of the patents involved.

The respondent refused to accept the administrative ruling and filed an administrative lawsuit with the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu Province, which made a judgment on December 1, 2020, rejecting its claim. The respondent refused to accept the judgment of first instance and appealed to the Supreme People's Court, and the Supreme People's Court made a final judgment on April 18, 2022, rejecting his claim and upholding the original judgment.

【 Expert Comments 】

The patent law enforcement officers make accurate use of the rules of evidence and legal presumption, which reflects the professionalism of administrative rulings. The final judgment pointed out that the prior art defense was not raised in the administrative processing procedure, and the prior art defense was raised in the administrative proceedings, which did not belong to the scope of the court's review of the legality of the administrative decision sued.(Yao Byobing, Vice President of Jiangsu Institute of Intellectual Property Protection and Development)

5. Hedong District Intellectual Property Office of Tianjin handled the design patent infringement dispute case of "French Fries Box"

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, Lu XX, is an individual merchant in Enshi, Hubei Province, and the patentee of the design patent named "French Fries Box", patent number ZL201930039762.6. The patent involved is legal and valid at the time when the claimant files the request for handling the infringement dispute.

On June 1, 2022, the claimant filed a request for the settlement of patent infringement disputes with the Intellectual Property Office of Hedong District of Tianjin on the grounds that the requested company, Tianjin Market Management Co., Ltd. was selling suspected infringing products without permission, and the Intellectual Property Office of Hedong District of Tianjin made a filing decision on the same day. Three law enforcement officers formed a panel to conduct a case-by-case study of the evidence submitted by the right holder, carefully compare and analyze the patented technology involved, and identify the possibility of infringement, patiently communicate with the requested person when serving the statement of defense, so that they realize the legal consequences of infringement, and the requested person immediately said that they would immediately stop selling the suspected infringing products and withdraw the publicity of the suspected infringing products.

In the process of handling the case, the case personnel carefully compared and analyzed, timely and accurately made the infringement judgment opinion, and on June 16, 2022, the two parties reached a settlement quickly. On July 12 of the same year, the mediation agreement was judicial confirmed by the court.

【 Expert Comments 】

The typical significance of this case is as follows: First, through the judicial confirmation of the administrative mediation agreement, the connection between administrative protection and judicial protection of intellectual property is strengthened, and the channels of intellectual property protection are broadened; Second, the case only takes 15 natural days from acceptance to settlement, giving full play to the advantages of efficient and convenient administrative protection; Third, the successful rights protection of individual industrial and commercial enterprises in different places reflects the "equal protection" of the "small special" intellectual property rights holders.(Yu Fenglei, Professor, Tianjin University Law School)

6. Beijing Intellectual Property Office handled a series of patent infringement disputes concerning "dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitor" invention

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant, Takeda Pharmaceutical Industry Co., Ltd. is the patentee of the invention patent entitled "dipeptidyl peptidase Inhibitor", patent number ZL201110006009.X.

The petitioner claimed that the requested parties, Beijing Bailingwei Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Maiuida Technology Co., Ltd. respectively committed the act of promising to sell infringing products without permission, and then submitted a request to the Beijing Intellectual Property Office for processing. On July 18, 2022, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office filed the case according to law. Beijing Balingwei Technology Co., Ltd. argued that it did not know that the compounds it displayed infringed the intellectual property rights of the requestor and has removed all relevant products from the market; Beijing Maiuida Technology Co., Ltd. argued that its official website only displayed the chemical reagents involved in the patent, which did not constitute a real infringement, and it has removed the relevant chemical reagents from the official website.

The Beijing Intellectual Property Office held that the products of alogliptin benzoate promised to be sold by the relevant website of Beijing Bailingwei Technology Co., Ltd. fell within the scope of protection of patent claims 1 to 3; The products of alogliptin promised to be sold by the relevant website of Beijing Merida Technology Co., Ltd. fall within the scope of protection of claims 1 and 2 of the patent concerned. On November 2, 2022, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office made administrative rulings on the two cases, ordering the requested person to stop promising to sell the infringing products involved.

【 Expert Comments 】

The case involved the treatment and prevention of diabetes medical invention patent infringement disputes, in order to find out the technical facts, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office assigned a technical investigation officer to issue investigation opinions, the collegiate team considered comprehensively, the final conclusion is professional and scientific. The handling of the case shows that China treats intellectual property rights protection equally and equally.(Yi Penghua, Deputy Secretary-General of Beijing Intellectual Property Judicial Protection Research Institute)

7. The Qiaoxi Market Supervision Administration of Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province investigated and investigated the case of Zhengzhou Pangbo Education Technology Co., Ltd. selling counterfeit patent commodities

【 Brief introduction 】

On December 23, 2021, the Qiaoxi Market Supervision Administration of Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province received a report, reflecting that the informant, Zhengzhou Pangbo Education Technology Co., Ltd. was suspected of selling counterfeit patented products. On the same day, the law enforcement personnel checked and found that the informant was conducting live broadcast sales on a platform, and the anchor Sun claimed in the broadcast room that the "Yipin extract" candy it sold had 3 invention patents, but it failed to provide relevant supporting documents. Law enforcement officers took photos and video evidence of the above on-site inspection, and approved the investigation on December 24 of the same year.

After investigation, the three invention patents mentioned by the parties in the live broadcast (patent number: ZL201610771906.2, ZL201711041407.9, ZL200710068855.8) are real and valid, and the corresponding technical solutions of two invention patents are not directly related to the products involved. The technical solution corresponding to the 1 patent is related to the product involved, but the party cannot provide the authorization document authorized by the patentee to use it.

On April 18, 2022, according to the provisions of the Patent Law and other laws and regulations, the Qiaoxi Market Supervision Administration determined that the party's behavior violated the provisions of the third paragraph of Article 84 of the Implementation Rules of the Patent Law, constituting a counterfeit patent, and made an administrative penalty decision of confiscating the illegal income of 72206.70 yuan and imposing a fine of 108310.10 yuan.

【 Expert Comments 】

The case involves the identification of counterfeit patents in the network environment. The handling of this case provides a reference for the investigation and investigation of the sale of counterfeit patent goods and the identification of patent marking carriers existing in the network live marketing platform, which is helpful to unify the law enforcement standards and improve the level and quality of law enforcement.(An Xiaoqiong, Director of Beijing Hanqun Law Firm)

8. Cross-regional handling of "chair (Moon chair)" design patent infringement disputes in Sichuan and Chongqing cities

【 Brief introduction 】

The applicant Du is the patentee of the design patent named "Chair (Moon chair)", patent number ZL202130435026.X.

The claimant believes that the requested person, Luo Mou, and a rattan art factory in Rongchang District, Chongqing City, without permission, produce and sell rattan chairs with the same design patent as the claimant, which is suspected to constitute infringement, and then respectively to Luzhou Intellectual Property Office in Sichuan Province and Rongchang District Intellectual Property Office in Chongqing City, the infringement dispute settlement request. The requested person believes that the rattan chair is purely handmade in accordance with the appearance style on the short video platform, and has been discontinued due to poor sales, without subjective malicious infringement.

After the acceptance of the case, because the patentee is in Yibin City, Sichuan Province, and the manufacturer and seller are in different cities (districts), the case is more difficult to handle. Yibin Intellectual Property Office of Sichuan Province, Luzhou Intellectual Property Office of Sichuan Province and Rongchang District Intellectual Property Office of Chongqing City notified the case situation, launched the Sichuan-Chongqing cooperation case joint office mechanism, creatively proposed to trace the whole chain from the patent owner to the sales link and production link, and the three departments conducted research and judgment on the case, and simultaneously tried the production and sales links.

On April 22, 2022, the intellectual property offices of the three places hosted the tripartite mediation in the form of online video conference, and the parties signed the agreement on administrative mediation of patent infringement disputes respectively, and then completed the judicial confirmation.

【 Expert Comments 】

The case involves cross-regional joint law enforcement and multi-party coordination, which is a practical implementation of strengthening the whole chain protection of intellectual property rights. This case effectively links administrative protection and judicial protection, continuously amplifies the superimposed effectiveness of administrative protection and judicial protection, and has achieved good legal and social effects.(Li Yufeng, Dean of the School of Intellectual Property, Southwest University of Political Science and Law; Yuan Jia, Associate Professor, Law School, Sichuan University)

9. Nanjing Intellectual Property Office of Jiangsu Province handled the patent infringement dispute case of "substituted oxazolidinone and its application in the field of blood coagulation"

【 Brief introduction 】

The claimant, Bayer Intellectual Property LLC, is the patentee of the invention patent entitled "Substituted oxazolidinone and its application in the field of blood coagulation", patent number ZL00818966.8.

The petitioner said that the products such as "Rivaroxaban tablets" exhibited by the petitioner Nanjing Hundsun Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. on its official website and other channels are completely consistent with the generic name and chemical name of the patented products involved, and are suspected of infringement. On December 2, 2019, Nanjing Intellectual Property Office filed a case according to law. Due to the impact of the novel coronavirus epidemic, the case was suspended on February 3, 2020, and resumed processing on May 7.

The respondent considers that the claimant's evidence does not prove that his conduct constitutes an offer of sale; Even if it is found to be a promise of sale, it is not considered as a patent infringement according to the relevant provisions of the Patent Law (amended in 2008). After hearing, Nanjing Intellectual Property Office made an administrative ruling on May 25, 2020, finding that the products exhibited by the requested party fell within the scope of protection of the patent claims involved, and the requested party constituted infringement.

The respondent refused to accept the administrative ruling and filed an administrative lawsuit with the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province, and the court of first instance ruled against his claim. The respondent shall file an appeal with the Supreme People's Court. On June 22, 2022, the Supreme People's Court made a final judgment, rejecting his claim and upholding the original judgment.

【 Expert Comments 】

The case mainly concerns the understanding of the relevant provisions of the Patent Law (amended in 2008). In the handling of the case, Nanjing Intellectual Property Office conducted a careful trial and found that the promised sales behavior involved in the case constituted patent infringement, which had sufficient legal basis and was worth recommending.(Song Jian, former President, Deputy Inspector, National trial Expert, Intellectual Property Division, Jiangsu High People's Court)

10. Shanghai Intellectual Property Office handled the invention patent infringement dispute case of "spacer profile and a insulation window unit using the profile"

【 Brief introduction 】

The petitioner Taino Wind Glass Insulation Holding Co., Ltd. is the patentee of the invention patent entitled "Spacer profile and a insulation window unit using the profile", patent number ZL200580030094.6.

The applicant found that the requested Weihai Yuguang Scherle Energy saving Materials Co., LTD., Weihai Yuguang Scherle Sealing Materials Co., LTD., Yuguang Scherle Energy saving Materials (Huai 'an) Co., Ltd. promised to sell related products at an exhibition, suspected of infringing its patent rights. After notarization and evidence collection, the claimant shall file a request for administrative adjudication of the patent infringement dispute with the Shanghai Intellectual Property Office. On December 20, 2021, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Office filed a case for acceptance, but due to the impact of the novel coronavirus epidemic, the case was suspended on the day of filing and resumed on March 14, 2022.

In the process of handling the case, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Office learned that there had been a cooperative relationship between the parties for many years, there was a good basis for mediation, and all parties had the willingness to mediate, and immediately decided to mediate first. As the parties are located in many places, the panel through the Shanghai Pudong New Area Intellectual Property Office to resolve the multi-regional cooperation mechanism of intellectual property disputes, and finally facilitated the parties to reach a consensus on three related cases.

Under the auspices of the Shanghai Intellectual Property Office, the parties completed the signing of the mediation agreement through remote video, and then completed the judicial confirmation.

【 Expert Comments 】

This case has a high demonstration value in the aspects of pre-mediation, remote mediation and judicial confirmation of patent infringement disputes, and fully demonstrates the positive significance of pre-mediation in patent administrative adjudication cases for settling disputes and settling disputes, harmonious and win-win.(Yuan Zhenfu, Dean and Associate Professor, School of Intellectual Property, Shanghai University)

More intellectual property information and services

The official subscription number of "Deep Trusted Intellectual Property Rights" on the code

官方订阅号.jpg

More in-depth and credible dynamic news, important data/reports of the intellectual property industry, etc

Code on the concern [deep trusted intellectual property service platform] official service number

官方服务号.jpeg

Related Cases

The top 10 cases of patent reexamination invalidity in 2022 were released

The top 10 cases of patent reexamination invalidation in 2022 include 8 cases of invention patent invalidation, 1 case of utility model patent invalidation and 1 case of design patent invalidation. The cases involved artificial intelligence, standard essential patents, genetically engineered drugs, traditional Chinese medicine compound preparations, new energy and other patented technologies,

2023-04-25

Detail

Ten typical cases of the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court in 2022 to serve and safeguard scientific and technological innovation

1, satellite navigation chip invention patent infringement case 2, "artificial bone" technology investment patent rights case 3, gene fingerprint detection of new varieties of plants 4, "tower granulation production particle compound fertilizer" invention patent infringement case 5, divided case application patent temporary protection fee case 6, involving criminal and civil cross technical secrets infringement case 7, Innovation "double cycle, multiple rounds" identification computer software infringement case 8, "You Manager" wechat marketing software unfair competition case 9, "Takeup switching device" service invention patent application right case 10, German enterprise "modified polyisocyanate" invention patent infringement case

2023-03-01

Detail

Is online shopping infringing when the goods are not even shipped?

The plaintiff a glass products company is the patentee of a wine bottle design patent, and the plaintiff believes that the defendant a winery company manufactured and sold a "lightning wine" (referred to as the accused infringing product), the accused infringing product completely falls within the scope of the plaintiff's patent protection, constituting a violation of the plaintiff's patent right.

2023-02-24

Detail

Guangdong High Court issued six typical cases of intellectual property crimes

Typical criminal cases of intellectual property rights in Guangdong courts 1, Yan and others counterfeiting registered trademarks - punishing the trademark crime of "second-hand refurbished" electrical appliances disguised as "original genuine products" 2, Yang Moumou, Wang Mou copyright infringement case - Combating the crime of online film and television works piracy 3, PI Moumou trade secret infringement case - Punishing the crime of former employees violating the technical secrets of the original enterprise Four, Dong Mou and others counterfeit registered trademark case - severely punish the crime of manufacturing and selling counterfeit registered trademark masks Five, Wang Mou's sale of counterfeit registered trademark case - Combat electric bullet window new form of trademark crime Six, Gao Mou repeatedly sold counterfeit registered trademark case - punish the trademark crime of live broadcasting with goods to know fake sales

2023-01-04

Detail

Shenzhen Municipal Regulatory Bureau issued a typical case of "brushing single speculation" unfair competition

Galima Company claims that the product accused of infringement adopts the design of the appearance patent No. ZL202030343224.9, and its behavior does not constitute infringement. In this regard, the Court of second instance held that Article 23 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Disputes (II) provides that: "Where the alleged infringing technical scheme or design falls within the scope of protection of the prior patent right involved, and the accused infringer argues that his technical scheme or design has been granted a patent right to not infringe the patent right involved, the people's court shall not support it."

2022-12-16

Detail

For patent cases | where there is no substantial difference in the overall visual effect through overall observation and comprehensive judgment, the two forms an approximation and fall into the scope of patent protection involved

2022-12-11

Detail

Typical case of national court | Invention patent infringement dispute case of "manufacturing method of vanadium nitride"

"A hemostatic clamp" invention patent infringement dispute Case No. 1: (2020) Zhejiang 02 Zhminchu 261 ★ Case Introduction ★ Plaintiff: Nanwei Medical Technology Co., LTD. (Nanwei Company for short) Defendant: Zhuji Pengtian Medical Equipment Co., LTD. (referred to as Pengtian Company) Nanwei Company is the patent holder of the invention of "a hemostatic clamp" with patent number ZL201410222753.7. Nanwei Company referred to as Pengtian company manufacturing and sales of "disposable hemostatic clamp" product suspected of infringement of its invention patent, to the court to request rights protection.

2022-11-22

Detail

32.4 million! Yunnan worm Valley IP dispute Tiktok was awarded a record amount of damages to Tencent

On October 26, Xi 'an Intermediate People's Court made a judgment of first instance on the lawsuit filed by Tencent on September 22, 2021, alleging that Tiktok infringed the copyright of Yunnan Worm Valley and unfair competition. The court held that Tiktok, as a platform, should undertake corresponding management obligations for the infringing content on its platform. At present, there are still a large number of users on the platform who have infringed on the works involved. Tiktok's failure to immediately take effective measures to delete, filter and intercept the relevant videos is an aid to infringement, and it must compensate Tencent for economic losses of more than 32.4 million yuan (an average of 2 million yuan per episode) and reasonable litigation costs of 426,931 yuan.

2022-11-03

Detail

The establishment elements of the legal source defense are discussed in the "Intelligent Story Machine" case by the interpretation of the case |

The defendant Qianghua Products Store believes that the accused infringing products sold by it have legal sources and should not be liable for compensation. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court held that the Qianghua product store submitted the order page screenshot of the 1688 e-commerce platform, the enterprise information of Yamei Electronic factory and the "Letter of Authorization" and other evidence, the recipient of the order Li Yongqiang and Qianghua product store operator Zhong Rihua husband and wife relationship, The delivery address and the business premises of Qianghua product store are all in the Hakka New World, Meixian District, Meizhou City

2022-10-31

Detail

No. 38765119 "Lipstick First Brother" trademark objection case

Cui Shudong, Director of the Trademark Office of the State Intellectual Property Office, pointed out at the release and interpretation of the "2021 Typical Cases of Trademark Opposition and Review" that the trademark opposition and review procedure is an important part of the trademark authorization and confirmation, which plays an important role in strengthening the source protection of intellectual property rights and optimizing the business environment.

2022-09-20

Detail

CASE

China National Knowledge Bureau releases 2022 Intellectual Property administrative protection typical cases!