Typical case of national court | Invention patent infringement dispute case of "manufacturing method of vanadium nitride"-Industry Classic Case-Shenzhen deep trust patent Agency Co., LTD

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

Patent chapter

In the 22nd World Intellectual Property Month, China IP specially launched the "National Court Intellectual Property Typical Cases in 2021", which covers 188 typical cases recommended by nearly 30 courts across the country, so as to provide readers with a more detailed understanding of the trial trend and development characteristics of China's intellectual property cases.

"Vanadium nitride manufacturing method" invention patent infringement dispute case

Case No. : (2020) Chuan01 Zhminchu 505

★Abbreviature of adjudication★

The evidence provided by the patentee of the infringing person's profits from the infringing act and the calculation method claimed by the patentee of the infringing person's profits from the infringing act should satisfy the basic rationality. The patentee shall state the relevant data sources, collection methods and other necessary information regarding the quantity and price of the alleged infringing product sold by the infringing party obtained from the premises of an outsider; If it cannot be explained, the people's court may discredit it.

★Introduction of a case★

Plaintiff: Pangang Group Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Pangang Group), Pangang Group Vanadium Titanium Resources Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Pangang Vanadium Titanium Co., LTD.)

Defendants: Chengdu Jinhui Technology Co., LTD. (referred to as Jinhui Company), Chongqing Vanjing Trading Co., LTD. (referred to as Vanjing Company), Jiangsu Yuxin Technology Co., LTD. (referred to as Yuxin Company)

Panzhihua Steel Group and Panzhihua Steel Vanadium and Titanium Company are the patentee of the invention patent with the patent name of "Vanadium nitride manufacturing method" and patent number ZL01139886.8 (namely the patent involved). In 2013, Yuxin began manufacturing the alleged infringing product vanadium nitride using a method that fell within the scope of the patent protection involved. After Pangang Group and Pangang Vanadium Titanium Company notarized and purchased the accused infringing products from Jinhui Company, it was found that Yuxin Company sold the accused infringing products to Vanadium Gem Company, and Vanadium Gem Company sold the accused infringing products to Jinhui Company. Pangang Group and Pangang Vanadium and Titanium Company then calculated Yuxin Company's 2013-2020 profits from the sale of accused infringing products by using the output and market price of accused infringing products of Yuxin Company published by the external website "China Ferroalloy Online" from the period of 2018 to 2020, and filed a lawsuit to require the defendants to stop manufacturing and selling the accused infringing products. And compensate its economic losses and reasonable expenses of more than 90 million yuan.

The Chengdu Intermediate People's Court of first instance held that Yuxin Company used the method that fell within the scope of patent protection to manufacture the accused infringing products, and used the accused infringing products to operate and sell, which had seriously infringed the patent rights of Panzhihua Steel Group and Panzhihua Steel Vanadium and Titanium Company, and should bear the corresponding civil liability. Similarly, Vanadium Jingjing Company sales accused of infringing products, should bear the corresponding civil liability. As for Jinhui Company, since it can provide a legitimate source of the alleged infringing products and it is subjectively unaware that the corresponding products are infringing products, Jinhui Company shall only be liable for part of the reasonable expenses of the plaintiff. The court took the operating income determined by Yuxin Company's 2013-2020 tax declaration as the reference base, and considered the contribution rate of the patents involved in the manufacturing of the accused infringing products and the profit margin of the sale of the accused infringing products, and decided that the defendants should compensate Pangang Group and Pangang Vanadium Titanium Company for economic losses of 29 million yuan.

After the judgment of the first instance, both the original and the defendant resigned and served the judgment, and the judgment of this case has come into effect.

Typical significance

The calculation method claimed by the patentee shall be consistent with the actual productive capacity of the infringing party. If the corresponding calculation method is unreasonable, the people's court may also refuse to adopt it. As for the Detailed List of Losses Covered by Enterprise Income Tax and the Annual Tax Return of Enterprise Income Tax, the corresponding evidence is not formed by the tax authority, so the court naturally cannot accept the profits obtained by the main business of the aggressor. However, as for the infringing party's main business sales income contained in the corresponding declaration form, because the infringing party, as the subject of tax payment, has the obligation to truthfully declare tax, the data reported to the tax authority before being notified to participate in the lawsuit has the basis of credibility. Then, on this basis, legal compensation is applied, and the corresponding amount is more reasonably determined by combining the sales profit rate of the accused infringing product and the contribution degree of the invention patent involved. (Intellectual Property, China Intellectual Property Magazine Network)

More information and services

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

官方订阅号.jpg

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

官方服务号.jpeg

CASE

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