If there is evidence to prove that the decision to declare the above-mentioned creditor's rights invalid has been revoked by the effective administrative judgment, the obligee may file another lawsuit.
If the patentee files a lawsuit again, the limitation period of action shall be counted from the date when the administrative judgment mentioned in the second paragraph of this article is served. Article 3. Where the patent right is declared invalid due to obvious violation of the provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 26 of the Patent Law, and the specification cannot be used to interpret the claim, and it does not belong to the circumstances as stipulated in Article 4 of this interpretation, the people's court hearing the patent infringement dispute case shall generally decide to suspend the lawsuit; If the patent right has not been declared invalid within a reasonable period, the people's court may determine the scope of protection of the patent right according to the records in the patent claim. Article 4 Where there are ambiguities in the grammar, characters, punctuation marks, figures and symbols in the patent claim, the specification and the appended drawings, but ordinary technicians in the field can obtain a unique understanding by reading the patent claim, the specification and the appended drawings, the people's court shall determine them according to the unique understanding. Article 5 When the people's court determines the scope of protection of the patent right, the technical features recorded in the preface, features, quotations and restrictions of the independent claim have a restrictive effect. Article 6 The people's court may use other patents related to the patent involved and their patent examination documents, effective patent authorization and confirmation judgment documents to explain the patent claims involved.
Patent examination files, including written materials submitted by the patent applicant or patentee in the patent examination, reexamination and invalidation procedures, notice of examination opinions, minutes of meetings, oral hearing records, effective patent reexamination request examination decisions and patent invalidation request examination decisions made by the patent administrative department of the State Council, etc. Article 7 Where other technical features are added to the technical scheme accused of infringement, including all the technical features of the enclosed claim, the people's court shall determine that the technical scheme accused of infringement does not belong to the protection scope of the patent right, except that the added technical features belong to the inevitable conventional impurities.
The closed composition claim mentioned in the preceding paragraph generally does not include the Chinese medicine composition claim. Article 8 Functional features refer to technical features that define structures, components, steps, conditions or the relationship between them through their functions or effects in invention-creation, except that ordinary technicians in the field can directly and clearly determine the specific implementation mode of the above functions or effects only by reading the claims.
Compared with the technical features necessary to realize the functions or effects mentioned in the preceding paragraph recorded in the specification and attached drawings, the corresponding technical features of the alleged infringement technical scheme are basically the same means to realize the same functions and achieve the same effects, and ordinary technicians in this field can associate them without creative labor when the alleged infringement occurs. The people's court shall determine that the corresponding technical features and functional features are the same or equivalent. Article 9 If the alleged infringing technical scheme cannot be applied to the use environment defined by the features of the use environment in the claim, the people's court shall determine that the alleged infringing technical scheme does not belong to the protection scope of the patent right. Article 10 If the technical features of the product defined by the preparation method in the claim are different from or the same as the preparation method of the accused infringing product, the people's court shall determine that the accused infringing technical scheme does not fall within the scope of patent protection. Article 11 Where the order of technical steps is not clearly stated in the method claim, but after reading the claim, the specification and the appended drawings, ordinary technicians in the field directly and clearly believe that the technical steps should be implemented in a specific order, the people's court shall determine that the order of the steps has a restrictive effect on the scope of patent protection. Article 12 The patent claims define numerical features with terms such as "at least" and "no more than". After reading the patent claims, specifications and drawings, ordinary technicians in this field think that this patent technical scheme particularly emphasizes the restrictive function of this term on technical features, and the people's court does not support the claim that different numerical features belong to equivalent features. Article 13 If the obligee proves that the restrictive modification or statement made by the patent applicant and the patentee to the patent claim, specification and drawings in the patent authorization and confirmation procedure has been explicitly denied, the people's court shall hold that the modification or statement did not lead to the abandonment of the technical scheme. Article 14 The people's court shall generally consider the design space of the same or similar product to which the design belongs at the time of the alleged infringement when determining the knowledge level and cognitive ability of ordinary consumers on the design. If the design space is large, the people's court may conclude that ordinary consumers usually don't easily notice small differences between different designs; If the design space is small, the people's court may conclude that ordinary consumers are usually more likely to notice small differences between different designs.