Patent inventor Hong Chuantian was born in Taiwan. He obtained a Chinese patent in 2003 and returned to the motherland in 2004 to investigate the mobile phone market. At that time, about 90% of the total domestic mobile phone market sales were occupied by overseas brands. The main reason was that the Chinese mobile phone industry lacked independence. Functional intellectual property. In 2005, Hong Chuantian invested the dual-SIM dual-standby mobile phone patent intellectual property into the motherland, hoping to create a Chinese brand multi-sim mobile phone with independent intellectual property rights that would sell well around the world. On September 1 of the same year, it was held at the Asia Regal Hotel in Shanghai. New invention conference, Global Online (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd. was established in Beijing in 2006. In 2007, mobile phones participated in the World Mobile Phone Exhibition in Shenzhen and Tianjin, China and won first place. At that time, several well-known overseas brands were interested in licensing cooperation, and only South Korea's Samsung In contempt of China's intellectual property rights, a large number of infringing dual-SIM dual-standby mobile phones were put into the market. The lawyer of Global Online (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd. notified South Korea's Samsung of the infringement in a letter. South Korea's Samsung responded by agreeing to negotiate and sign a mutual confidentiality agreement with the company to negotiate. Content: If the negotiation fails to resolve the infringement, Global Online (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd. cannot publish it in the media or online for a period of three years. After the confidentiality agreement was signed, South Korea's Samsung immediately turned back and argued that there was no infringement. At that time, the inventor knew that he had been deceived by the Koreans. South Korea's Samsung, with its wealth and power behind the scenes, countersued the Chinese patent for invalidity, and the national intellectual property review in 2009 The committee's chief reviewers Zuo Yi, Zhang Lin, and Wu Lei actually ruled that their Chinese patent was invalid, allowing Samsung to succeed. In 2010, a Beijing Intermediate People's Court ruled to revoke the State Intellectual Property Office's Patent Reexamination Committee's review decision on the invalidation request for this patent. In the past five years, South Korea's Samsung has used unscrupulous means to cause the National Intellectual Property Review Commission and the Beijing High Court to declare the case invalid and misjudgment. This case has now been filed for retrial before the Supreme People's Court of the country.