Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co. KG Vs. the CNIPA in the Second instance of Administrative Dispute over Patent Invalidation
Heard by: Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court
Outcome of Trial: Uphold the validity of the patent
On August 1, 2017, the CNIPA decided on the examination of invalidation request No. 32984, upholding the validity of the patent. Dissatisfied with the result, the invalidation petitioner filed an administrative lawsuit. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court made the first instance judgment: revoke the accused decision made by the CNPIA and order a reexamination on the request for invalidation of the patent involved. On behalf of the client, Sanyou refused to accept the first instance judgment and filed an appeal. The Supreme People's Court revoked the first instance judgment and upheld the patent.
In this case, the Supreme People's Court confirmed the legal principle of "consideration of invention conception in the identification of distinguished technical features". Specifically, when determining the distinguishing technical features of the claimed invention in contrast to the closest prior art, it is necessary to identify the technical difference between the invention and the closest prior art based on the inventive concept. If the inventive concept lies in the combination of the corresponding technical means, and the prior art neither directly nor implicitly discloses the teaching of this combination, nor does it disclose the technical effects that this combination can produce, then the combination of the technical means protected by the invention shall be treated as a whole in identifying distinguishing technical features, and it is not appropriate to use a single technical means as the reason in determining distinguishing technical features.
This case was selected by the Supreme People's Court as a typical case in 2020, for its strong guidance in the judgment of creativity in similar cases.
Part of the public information from our website is from the internet. Reposting of such is intended to spread more information and promote network sharing. They do not represent the opinions or any other suggestions of our website and we are not responsible for their authenticity. Part of the works of our website, which we just edit and upload, are from voluntary contributors. Our website only serves as a communicational platform for such works and therefore bears no responsibility for any copyright issues involved. In case you find any works violating your intellectual property rights, please contact us, so that we may change or remove them in time.
All information provided is for reference only. We do not guarantee the accuracy, validity, timeliness and integrity of the information. Our website and our employees are not directly or indirectly responsible to the users or any other people in any way, for any faults, inaccuracy or errors in delivering any information. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, our website claims that we do not assume liability for any direct, indirect, collateral, consequential, special, punitive or exemplary damages of any user or any other person, incurred by using or failing to use any information or links provided by this website.
- Chongqing Intellectual Property Court officially established [2021-07-20 16:39]
- The reply of the Supreme Court of China clarifies the Issue concerning the Defendant’s Request for Compensation for Reasonable Expenses on the Grounds of the Plaintiff’s Abuse of Rights in Intellectual Property Infringement Lawsuits [2021-06-22 12:05]
- Patent Development Report on 6G Communication Technology: China ranks first globally in patent applications in this area [2021-06-22 11:46]
- Beijing Sanyou Intellectual Property Agency Co., Ltd. listed as a local firm with strong international IPR service capabilities in Beijing [2020-11-13 15:18]
- Civil Code: Newly added punitive damages for intellectual property rights infringement, providing legal basis for save clause [2020-11-06 13:24]