Sanyou Client: A South Korean company

Hearing Organ: Ningbo Intellectual Property Office

Ruling: The respondent is ordered to immediately stop manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale of the infringing products, and to immediately destroy the specialized equipment, molds, etc. used to manufacture infringing products.

Case facts

The petitioner, a South Korean company, discovered that the respondent was selling cosmetic packaging containers that were similar to their design patents. Therefore, they entrusted Sanyou to file a patent infringement request with the corresponding administrative authority.

Focus of disputes

Sanyou attorneys conducted an investigation and evidence collection on the accused infringing party and the accused infringing product, and notarized the relevant goods-receiving process and related chat records. In the chat record, the respondent indirectly admitted to their manufacturing behavior. The accused infringing product and the involved patent are basically the same in terms of overall structure, shape of each component, etc. The main difference is that the lid of the involved patent uses completely transparent materials, while the lid of the accused infringing product uses transparent, semi-transparent or opaque materials. For accused infringing products that use transparent or semi-transparent materials for lids, the shape inside the lid can still be seen or vaguely seen, and this difference does not have a significant impact on the overall visual effect, falling within the scope of protection of the involved patent right.

Now that the respondent sells the accused infringing products in large quantities without providing proof of legal source, it can be reasonably inferred that the respondent has engaged in manufacturing the accused infringing products.

Typical significance

This case highlights that the focus of protection for design patents lies in the overall visual effect. Even if there are differences between certain details of the accused infringing product and the design patent, if these differences are not significant enough to have a significant impact on the overall visual effect, it may still constitute patent infringement. The ruling also reflects the need for a comprehensive comparison between the patent and the accused infringing product when assessing whether there is infringement of a design patent. The key to determining infringement lies in whether there are significant differences that affect the overall visual effect.

Practical suggestions

When applying for a design patent, it should be noted that the protection scope mainly focuses on the overall visual effect, and comprehensive and meticulous consideration should be given to the design. Individuals or companies holding patent rights should actively monitor the market and promptly appeal and protect their rights against possible infringement.