Long An Persuaded Cược 8xbetupreme Court to Order Retrial of a Patent Case

Recently, Cược 8xbetupreme People’s Court (2017) issued a civil ruling No. 1826 on patent infringement disputes concerning invention of ZL200710019425.7 and shark fin antenna, directing the Jiangsu Higher People’s Court to retry the case and suspend the execution of the original judgment of Cược 8xbetecond instance.

The applicant for retrial in this case is the holder of the patent in question. The patent in question mainly relates to a shark fin radio signal receiving antenna for vehicles and ships. In 2015, the applicant filed a lawsuit in Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court of Jiangsu Province, considering that Chongqing Lifan Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. and other companies had implemented their patents without their permission. After the trial, the court of first instance decided that the defendant should stop the infringement and assume the liability of compensation of 2 million yuan. Chongqing Lifan Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. refused to accept the first judgment and appealed to Jiangsu Provincial Higher People’s Court. Jiangsu Provincial Higher People’s Court held that according to the principle of estoppel, the patentee had abandoned part of the technical scheme in the invalid procedure, the products infringed upon had not fallen into Cược 8xbetcope of patent protection in the case, and Chongqing Lifan Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. did not constitute patent infringement right.

The patentee Jiang Mou and others refused to accept Cược 8xbetecond trial decision and entrusted Zhao Yanxiong, a senior partner of Long An, to apply to Cược 8xbetupreme People’s Court for retrial. Long An team believes that the court of second instance did not take Cược 8xbettage of patent authorization and confirmation as a whole to conduct an objective and comprehensive review. In fact, the patentee did not abandon any technical scheme in the invalid procedure of the patent involved. The restrictive interpretation made by the patentee at the authorization stage has been clearly denied, and the confirmation stage has not overturned the determination. It should be recognized that the restrictive interpretation did not lead to the abandonment of the technical scheme and does not apply the principle of estoppel. The court of second instance has errors in understanding and applying the principle of Estoppel in relevant judicial interpretations. This case belongs to Cược 8xbetituation that should be retried as stipulated in Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Law. Finally, Cược 8xbetupreme People’s Court adopted Long An point of view and ordered the Jiangsu Higher People’s Court to retry the case.

长按识别二维码更多精彩