Patent infringement problem

First of all, I would like to remind you that there is no substantive examination of utility models, that is to say, even if someone has applied for the same utility model patent before, as long as there is no problem with the submitted materials, your application will be authorized.

According to what you mentioned, I understand that B added a socket to A's patented product-B has one more technical feature than A. ..

This new technical feature (new socket) should be discussed in two situations.

1. This socket is creative, that is to say, compared with the prior art, the utility model has substantial features and progress.

At this point, A cannot invalidate B on the grounds of its own patent.

However, B's products contain all the technical features of A, therefore, B's production, manufacture, sales, promised sales and other acts are all tort. According to Article 7 of the Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretation on patent infringement, the principle of universal application, the accused infringer has added new technical features on the basis of all necessary technical features in the patent claim, which constitutes the same infringement and belongs to the protection scope of the patent right. At this point, whether the technical effect of the accused infringing object is the same as the patented technology is not considered.

Therefore, if Party B needs to exploit its patent, it must negotiate a license agreement with Party A, and the patented technology can only be exploited after Party A's permission.

2. The socket is not creative, that is, compared with the prior art, the utility model has no substantive features and progress.

At this time, you can make an invalid request to the Intellectual Property Office. Compared with A's patent, B's interface is not creative, and B's patent will be invalid.

I hope you are satisfied. You can continue to leave a message if you have any questions.