What are the criteria for judging the infringement of utility model patents?

What are the criteria for judging the infringement of utility model patents? (III) Application of the Principle of Equivalence Many entrepreneurs may find that the patent for utility model has been infringed in the process of starting a business. Then, do you know the criteria for judging the infringement of utility model patents? Next, let Bian Xiao introduce you. What are the criteria for judging the infringement of utility model patents? (1) Comparison of judging utility model patent infringement 1. When judging infringement, all the necessary technical features of the technical scheme recorded in the claim shall be compared with all the technical features of the object (product or method) accused of infringement one by one. 2, infringement judgment, generally do not directly compare the patent product infringement and infringing goods infringement. Patented products can be used to help understand relevant technical features and technical solutions. 3. When both parties of the original defendant have patent rights, it is generally impossible to compare the infringement with the patented products of both parties or the patent claims of both parties. 4, product invention or utility model patent infringement judgment comparison, generally do not consider whether the infringing object and patented technology are in the same application field. (ii) Application of the principle of universal coverage. Full coverage means that the accused infringer (product or method) reproduces all the necessary technical features of the technical scheme recorded in the patent claim, and the accused infringer (product or method) corresponds to and is the same as all the necessary technical features recorded in the patent independent claim. 6. The principle of universal coverage is the principle of covering all technical features or the principle of literal infringement. That is, if the technical features of the object (product or method) accused of infringement include all the necessary technical features recorded in the claim, it belongs to the protection scope of the patent right. 7. When the necessary technical features recorded in the patent independent claim adopt the upper conceptual features and the accused infringer (product or method) adopts the corresponding lower conceptual features, the accused infringer (product or method) falls into the protection scope of the patent right. 8. The object (product or method) accused of infringement has added new technical features on the basis of using all the necessary technical features in the claim, and it still belongs to the protection scope of the patent right. At this time, whether the technical effect of the accused infringing object (product or method) is the same as the patented technology is not considered. 9. The accused infringing object (product or method) is an improved technical scheme for the prior patented technology, and the patented object belongs to the subordinate patent. Without the permission of the prior patentee, the implementation of the subordinate patent also covers the protection scope of the prior patent.