亚洲中文字幕日产无码2020,国产精品186在线观看在线播放,久久婷婷五月综合色99啪ak,国产精品麻豆aⅴ人妻

Unitalen Client BSC Group Won the Patent Infringement Litigation with the Supreme People’s Court – Whether “Estoppel” Applicable to a Modification Made during Patent Substantive Examination?

August 17, 2020

Background:

The plaintiff and patentee, BCS Group (Italy), submitted an invention patent application titled "Agricultural Drives and Related Tools" (hereinafter referred to as “the patent involved”) to the State Intellectual Property Office of China on March 30, 2010, which was granted on September 9, 2015.

The defendant, Yongkang Hongyue, manufactures and sells a “Snow Blower” product of "Hongyue 740" model, which used the patent involved without the permission of the plaintiff and thus infringed the patent right involved.

Entrusted by BSC Group, Unitalen filed a patent infringement lawsuit with the Hangzhou Intermediate Court in 2018. The Hangzhou Intermediate Court ruled in July 2019 that Yongkang Hongyue should immediately stop the infringement and compensate BCS for economic losses. In refusal to accept the judgment of the first instance, the defendant appealed to the Supreme People’s Court.

Court Ruling:

After the trail, the IP division of the Supreme People’s Court found that Yongkang Hongyue's appeal was not valid, so the ruling of the first instance shall be upheld. Thus BCS Group won the ultimate victory in this patent infringement case against Yongkang Hongyue.

Typical Significance:

The focal dispute in this case is: under what circumstances will BCS’ modification to the claims and statement of opinions in the patent examination process constitute “estoppel”?

During the substantive examination of the patent involved, the examiner rejected the novelty of the additional feature "approximately inclined by 45°" in the original claim 5 and 10 in the first examination opinion. In reply to the first examination opinion , BCS merged all the additional features in the original claim 2-5 and 7-10 and some of the features in the specification into claim 1 and 6, respectively; thus finally obtained the authorization.

First of all, it is necessary to determine whether the above-mentioned modification made by BCS constitutes the abandonment of the "approximately inclined by 45°" technical solution and other similar solutions. In the above-mentioned reply, BCS did not conduct a comparative analysis of the feature "approximately inclined by 45°", did not specifically state the difference between this feature and the prior art, nor did BSC point out the possible technical effects of the difference in angle; also, the distinguishing features and technical effects pointed out by BCS have nothing to do with the above-mentioned angle features, so the above-mentioned modifications do not lead to the legal effect of abandoning the technical solution.

Therefore, the defendant’s claim that "the angle of its products is greater than 60 degrees, and the constrictive modification made by BCS has led to the abandonment of other equivalent solutions to the 45-degree angle technical solution, the estoppel principle should be applied" cannot be established.

 

Keywords

主站蜘蛛池模板: 色婷婷综合和线在线| 一区一区三区产品乱码亚洲| 国产 国语对白 露脸| 国产精品_九九99久久精品| 亚州av综合色区无码一区| 萝卜视频高清免费视频日本| 中文字幕日韩人妻不卡一区| 亚洲乱码高清午夜理论电影| 成人免费无码大片a毛片抽搐色欲 亚洲成a∨人片在线观看不卡 | 久热国产精品视频一区二区三区| 波多野结衣一区二区三区高清av| 亚洲精品黑牛一区二区三区| 欧美人与性囗牲恔配| 国产微拍无码精品一区| 鲁大师免费观看日韩| 欧美又粗又大aaa片| 99久久国产精品免费高潮| 18禁成人黄网站免费观看| h肉动漫无码无修6080动漫网| 狠狠cao2020高清视频| 久久综合精品国产丝袜长腿| 天天日天天干天天操| 精品国产乱码久久久久app下载| 亚洲综合成人婷婷五月在线观看| 青青青国产精品免费观看| 无码av中文一二三区| 欧美一区二区三区红桃小说 | 亚洲香蕉免费有线视频| 欧美最猛性xxxxx黑人巨茎| 女厕偷窥一区二区三区| 久久精品一区二区三区中文字幕| 国产精品成人无码免费| 亚洲精品第一国产综合精品| 国产亚洲一本大道中文在线| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 欧美xxxx精品另类| 综合图区亚洲另类图片| 最爽无遮挡行房视频| 亚洲人成77777在线播放网站| 午夜时刻免费入口| 人与动人物xxxx毛片|