中文/English

Boss & Young agent case of submandibic case selected patent review committee in 2013 ten cases

2014-4-21 14:44| Announcer: admin

The Patent Reexamination Board of the State Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Reexamination Board) has carefully organized and strictly screened and introduced 10 major cases in 2013, on the occasion of the 14th World Intellectual Property Day, Including the concern of the "small 'i' robot" patent invalid declaration request, or will affect hundreds of millions of micro-users of the "online yellow pages" patent invalid request, reflects the biological enterprises struggling to fight back "lysine production Method "patent invalidation request and administrative litigation case and a series of cases of concern to the community. These cases, some social influence, high news attention, and some have been or will soon have an important impact on the industry or industry, and some involve major or difficult legal issues, and some of the patent review standards for the development and implementation of a guide significance.

Patent Reexamination Board issued the top ten cases, covering the mechanical, electrical, communications, medicine, materials and other fields. These major cases are patent review committee in accordance with the objective, fair, accurate and timely requirements, according to the results of the review, fully embodies the Patent Reexamination Board awe of the law, focus on responsibility, grasp the essence of the implementation of consistent review.

一、Small "i" robot patent invalid case of domestic enterprises first battle victory

Patents: Shanghai Zhizhen Network Technology Co., Ltd

Invalid filing request person: Apple Computer Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.

【Case】

The patent application for "a chat robotic system" application number 200410053749.9 was authorized in 2009. After the patent authorization, the franchisee Shanghai Zhizhen Internet Company filed a lawsuit against the Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court, suing Apple's use of the siri program in its iPhone to infringe its patent rights. In response to the claim, Apple filed an invalidation request to the Patent Reexamination Board.

The Patent Reexamination Board has, by trial, made a decision 21307 to maintain the validity of the patent right involved. At the end of 2013, Apple filed an administrative suit against the decision. In February 2014, the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court set up a five-member collegial panel to hear the case publicly.

【Comments】

In view of the case, the Patent Reexamination Board set up a five-member collegial panel, whether the disclosure of the instructions is sufficient, whether the claim is supported by the instructions, whether the scope of protection is clear, whether it is novel and creative, and finally the patent is valid The

However, China Mobile, China Telecom, China Construction Bank, QQ, microblogging, etc. provide a variety of intelligent chat features are behind the small "i" robot in the provision of the "i" robot is not as well as Apple's siri program, Technical Support. The technology through voice, visual, somatosensory control and other means for the user service, in the future intelligent network robot market potential unlimited. At present, the community is still concerned about the progress of the case.

二、Patent invalid case started car networking field patent war first shot

Patents: Domestic Individuals

Invalid declaration of the request: Chongqing City, Gold Card Traffic Information Industry Co., Ltd., ZTE Corporation

【Case】

The car network refers to the car and the car, the car and the road, the car and the person, the car and the sensing equipment and so on, realizes in the information network platform to all the vehicle attribute information and the static and the dynamic information carries on the extraction and the effective use, Of the functional requirements of the operation of all vehicles to carry out effective regulation and provide integrated services.

The patentee in February 2013, including the applicant, including a number of enterprises filed an infringement litigation, that the latter related products infringement of its patent number 01140246.6, entitled "motor vehicle intelligent integrated management system and management methods" Patent, litigation subject amount of up to 6 million yuan. In March the same year, the above-mentioned claimant submitted a request for invalidation to the Patent Reexamination Board respectively. The Patent Reexamination Board shall, after the hearing of the case, make decision 21469 to declare that the patent right is invalid. The patentee did not bring an administrative action within the litigation period and revoked the relevant infringement litigation.

【Comments】

The popularization of car networking technology is regarded as one of the development trends of current automobile technology. Our enterprises have also joined the R & D layout of the technology. According to the relevant forecast, it is expected that by 2015, the market size of car networking applications and services is expected to exceed 150 billion yuan. The case for the field of China's car network occurred in the first case of patent disputes, also known as "opened the car network patent war prelude", due to the high subject matter involved in the proceedings, much concern in the industry.

Patent Reexamination Board in strict accordance with the relevant provisions of the Patent Law, the case of an objective and impartial trial, review conclusions for the future development of domestic car networking industry has an important impact. At the same time, given the typical characteristics of the combination of computer software and hardware commonly found in car networking patents, the above decisions are also instructive for the implementation of the review standards for related cases in the field of Internet and even Internet of Things.

三、Patented maintenance to improve the patent to open a broad market

Patents: Domestic Individuals

Invalid declaration of the request: Beijing China Trade Promotion Advisory Center

【Case】

Patent patent number 200810045235.7 patent in 2010 was authorized, its background technology CN1050589C patented the use of yttria and cerium oxide as a stabilizer to prepare ceramic ball, because of the high cost, in the field of sandblasting has limitations. The patent of the present invention has been improved on the basis of the above-mentioned background art, and the use of alumina and calcium oxide instead of yttrium oxide and cerium oxide as stabilizers has significantly reduced the cost and achieved similar technical effects.

In 2013, Beijing China Trade Promotion and Trade Advisory Center for the patent pending the request for invalidation of the request, one of the evidence has been in force for the invention of CN1050589C patent infringement dispute civil judgment, the verdict in the verdict identified infringing products constitute the use of this patent public. Upon review, the Patent Reexamination Board made decision 21569 to maintain the patent rights involved.

【Comments】

Ceramic sandblasting beads can be used for metal and plastic workpiece surface treatment, widely used in metal processing, aerospace special equipment, surface treatment and other fields. The patent used in the preparation of low-cost raw materials to produce the physical and chemical parameters are in line with the relevant standards of the product, which brings significant economic benefits, are typical of the improved patent.

The Patent Reexamination Board shall examine and decide on the technical problems that have been actually solved from the technical solutions, the technical means taken and the technical effects achieved, accurately grasp the essence of the invention, reasonably define the scope of protection of the claims, and make a comprehensive judgment on the relevant fields The implementation of the review criteria is instructive. At the same time, zirconium silicate ceramic sandblasting beads due to the low price, can be recycled and other advantages, the Patent Reexamination Board to maintain the patent effect will be involved in the metal and plastic surface treatment and other fields to promote the use of.

四、Domestic biological enterprises struggling to counter the final invalidation of lysine patents

Authorized person: Ajinomoto Co., Ltd.

Invalid declaration request: Changchun Dahe Biotechnology Development Co., Ltd

【Case】

The patent involved relates to the production of lysine by microbial fermentation, and patent number is 94194707.6. In September 2008, Changchun Dahe Biology Company filed an invalidation request to the Patent Reexamination Board for the patent.

After the hearing of the case, the relevant patent claims are not supported by the instructions on the grounds, the declaration of patent rights are all invalid, and in the review decision in the field of microorganisms in accordance with the contents of the full disclosure of the contents of a reasonable summary of the scope and extent. The case by the first instance, second instance and retrial, have maintained the Patent Reexamination Board No. 13841 review decision.

【Comments】

The patentee involved in the international food manufacturing industry giants, since 2006 has been in the United States, Germany and domestic prosecution of Changchun Daixi many violations of its patent rights for the development of China's biological enterprises set up obstacles. Not only that, including the case of the request, including a number of domestic enterprises in the United States was involved in lysine "337 investigation" case up to 3 years, but eventually to the Chinese side to close the case.

The review of this case clarifies the review ideas and methods that can reasonably be summarized as a specific strain or a specific sorted strain by a preserved strain, which is highly instructive for the functional limitation review practice in the microbial type claim.

五、The new drug method invented the patent difficult to be authorized

Authorized by: Cabysts Pharmaceuticals

Invalid claimant: domestic individual

【Case】

U.S. Patent No. 99812498.2, entitled & quot; Method of Administration of Antibiotics, & quot; the disclosures of which relate to the use of chlormime in the manufacture of a medicament for the treatment of bacterial infections in a patient without the production of skeletal muscle toxicity and limiting the dose and repetition Frequency of administration. The requestor's request for a notice of invalidation to the Patent Reexamination Board is made at the time of the therapeutic dose and the time of repeated administration of the claim for the type of pharmaceutical use.

The Patent Reexamination Board has considered that the information on the treatment regimen such as the dosage and the time interval of administration does not distinguish the pharmaceutical use of the patent in question from the known use of the prior art and therefore makes a decision No. 13188 to declare that the patent The The case has passed the first instance, second instance and retrial, have maintained the Patent Reexamination Board of the above review and decision.

【Comments】

Somycin is known to be antibiotics, and the use of high-dose drugs in the prior art is prone to skeletal muscle toxicity, leading to the inability to clinically apply, and the original drug company has given up further study of the drug. Cabis Pharmaceuticals found that at the appropriate dosing interval, administration of the appropriate dose did not produce skeletal muscle toxicity, making the clinical application of methicillin made significant progress.

The Patent Reexamination Board considers that the limits of the patent and the frequency of repeated administration are only reflected in the course of the administration and do not lead to a change in the pharmaceutical process. The Supreme People's Court supported the views of the Patent Reexamination Board in the retrial ruling and, for the first time, showed attitudes towards the limiting role of the second drug use right in terms of drug characteristics, which was instructive for subsequent similar cases.

六、Foreign enterprises "no leaf fan" patent rights are equally protected

Patents: Dongguan City, Xu Ermei Electric Technology Co., Ltd.

Invalid Notice Applicant: Dyson Limited

【Case】

Xu Ermei Electric Company in June 2012 was granted patent number 201130243517.0, entitled "floor-mounted fan (2)" design patent license. In October 2012, Dyson filed an invalidation request to the Patent Reexamination Board. In this case, Dyson announced that one of the domestic enterprises or individuals had no patent rights related to the non-leaf fan.

After reviewing the Patent Reexamination Board, the patent on the edge of the fan nozzle groove, the nut on the bracket and the diameter of the nozzle and the base than the design features or in the visual difficult to focus on the site, or belonging to the common design, local subtle changes , Will not have a significant impact on the overall visual effects of the product, compared with the existing design features of the combination is not significantly different, so to make a decision No. 21625 review, declared the patent rights involved all invalid.

【Comments】

As a technology leader in the field of non-leaf fan, Dyson has made a series of patent applications in China since 2008, and at the same time, some domestic enterprises or individuals have started to develop related products and apply for patent, market competition More intense.

Dyson strong sense of rights, continuous in the China Import and Export Fair and other exhibitions to carry out patent rights action, and infringement of its relevant fan products patent infringement litigation and invalid declaration request. Dyson series of rights cases once caused widespread concern inside and outside the industry, the State Intellectual Property Office of the former director Tian Lipu in an interview with the "Times" reporter said that China supports intellectual property rights in their rights violations in China filed a rights infringement litigation. The case group agreed to seek truth from facts, the principle of equal treatment, according to the law declared patent invalid, to protect the legitimate rights of foreign enterprises in China.

七、"Online Yellow Pages" patent is maintained or affected by millions of WeChat users

Patents: Domestic Individuals

Invalid Notice Applicant: Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd

【Case】

The patentee infringes any of the features in the WeChat application with the patent number 200910084756.8 entitled "System and Method for Providing Online Yellow Pages Phonebook Associated with Location Information", and in 2013, Tencent Company v. To Jinan City, Shandong Province Intermediate People 's Court. In the same year, Tencent filed a request for invalidation to the Patent Reexamination Board twice on the grounds that the disclosure of the instructions was inadequate and the claim was not supported by the instructions, the scope of protection was unclear, the necessary technical features were not available, , Creativity and so on. The Patent Reexamination Board has set up a five-member collegial panel to merge the two invalid cases and make decision 21763 to maintain the validity of the patent right.

【Comments】

WeChat is Tencent in early 2011 launched a smart phone free application, integrated text, photo delivery, friends circle, near the people, the public account query and other functions. As of November 2013, micro-registered users have exceeded 600 million, is the largest user groups in Asia mobile instant messaging software.

As the patentee in the infringement litigation requires Tencent to stop using the "nearby people" "WeChat public account" function of the appeal may affect many WeChat users, so the case caused the industry and many media attention. Patent Reexamination Board from the case, fully listen to the two sides of the defense, the case was a comprehensive combing, after repeated negotiations to make a review decision.

八、Medicinal Substitution Patent is ineffective due to lack of creativity

Registrar: Guangzhou Baiyun Shanghe Huangpu Traditional Chinese Medicine Co., Ltd

Invalid declaration of the requestor: Yan'an Chang Tai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

【Case】

Yanan Chang Tai Pharmaceutical Company in November 2011, for patent number 200710151989.6, entitled "the treatment of oral inflammation of traditional Chinese medicine preparation and its preparation method" patent rights to the Patent Reexamination Board to request a declaration of invalidation.

The patent is used in the stomatology of traditional Chinese medicine in the use of honeysuckle instead of honeysuckle in the prior art, and claimed that this alternative produced a better technical effect. Therefore, for obvious and unexpected technical effect of the judge to become involved in the patent has a creative focus of the controversy. The Patent Reexamination Board review decision and the second instance verdict all argue that it is obvious that the artisan on the basis of the prior art, using the honeysuckle instead of honeysuckle is obvious, and that part of the statistical analysis does not have significant differences in experimental data And can not prove the use of mountain silver spent to achieve unexpected technical results. Accordingly, the Patent Reexamination Board made no decision No. 18566 on the grounds that it did not have the creativity and declared that the patent right was invalid. At present, the above decision has entered into force.

【Comments】

This case involves a daily life called "mouth Yanqing particles" of oral inflammation commonly used in traditional Chinese medicine, the drug is widely used. 2005 edition of the "People's Republic of China Pharmacopoeia" on the honeysuckle and honeysuckle were a clear distinction.

The trial of the case, so that the general public to further understand the use of honeysuckle instead of honeysuckle can produce the actual effect of the difference, to help the public rational choice of a reasonable drug has a positive significance. In addition, the case in the field of traditional Chinese medicine patent examination practice, the common type of drug substitution to create creative judgment has a high reference value.

九、"Electrical connector" invalid case delineated USB standard patent limit

Patents: Foxconn (Kunshan) Computer Connector Co., Ltd., Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd.

Invalid Proclamation: Pride Precision Electronics (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Nanjing Xuanwu District Jiang Honghan Business Center

【Case】

Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface as a standard input / output interface, is widely used in many electronic equipment design. Involved in the patent for the USB3.0 standard in an important patent, patent number 200810128623.1. One of the claimants is a subsidiary of Taiwan Jiaze Company, Taiwan Jiaze Company and the patent owner Hon Hai Company is the global IT equipment, electrical connector design and production of leading enterprises, and with the USB3.0 contributor agreement Sign party

In July 2012, Foxconn (Kunshan), an affiliated company of Hon Hai Company, applied to the Jiangsu Provincial Intellectual Property Office for the prohibition of the manufacture and sale of two Chinese patent products related to the USB3.0 technical standard. The relevant infringement dispute decision decided that Jiazawa subsidiary constitutes a tort, Jiazze subsidiary company then made a request for invalidation. The Patent Reexamination Board shall, after hearing, make a decision on the examination and approval of No. 20052 to maintain the patent right involved.

【Comments】

Hon Hai and Taiwan Jiaze company's USB3.0 patent war for many years, both sides of the patent war spread from China to the United States. Involved in patent invalidation request, infringement dispute processing results related to the USB3.0 electrical connector industrial layout, the mainland and Taiwan, a number of media have given the relevant reports.

Intellectual property and technical standards for the enterprise is a double-edged sword, challenges and opportunities coexist. The Patent Group of the case has made a better deal with the patent licensing issues in the technical standards, which is of positive significance to clarify the patent disputes between Hon Hai Company and Taiwan Jiaze Company. At the same time, the case is also with the National Standardization Management Committee, the State Intellectual Property Office issued a "national standards related to the provisions of the patent management (temporary)" consistent with the spirit of the typical significance.

十、"Stainless steel tube" tensile strength improvement method patent application final rejected

Applicant: Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd.

【Case】

Applicant submitted a method for improving the tensile strength of duplex stainless steel pipe in 2008, filed August 2008. In August 2011, the original examination department of the State Intellectual Property Office, after a substantive examination, Article 22, paragraph 3, of the Patent Law on the basis of creative provisions rejected the application. Sumitomo Metal Industries Co., Ltd. refused to refute the decision to the Patent Reexamination Board to request a review. The collegial panel uses a document that is closest to the prior art and incorporates a sufficient account of the review that the application is not creative. The respondent shall not reply within the specified time limit, and the application shall be deemed to be withdrawn.

【Comments】

Applicants are Japan's major steel production operators, mainly engaged in iron and steel smelting and processing business. Duplex stainless steel materials with high strength, wide range of applications, the processing of corrective procedures for concern. The prior art generally adjusts the mechanical strength of the duplex stainless steel material by adjusting the chemical composition or adjusting the solution heat treatment conditions, and the application is adjusted by adjusting the rolling amount of the straightening machine to adjust the mechanical strength.

In the stage of the review request review, the collegial panel adopted a comparative document and combined with the full reason, so that the facts clearly clear, accurate, reasonable reason, embodies the Patent Reexamination Board in strict accordance with the objective, fair, accurate and timely requirements, according to the patent Review.

Address: 5/F, Tower A, GT International Center, Jia 3 Yongandongli, Jianguomenwai Ave, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022, China
Tel:+86-10-5879 3300Fax:+86-10-5879 3311Email: mail@boss-young.cn
返回顶部