Patent infringement in Zhejiang

[? A billion euro guide? ]? The plaintiff, Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry, has withdrawn the lawsuit No.20 1 8, and obtained the permission of Sichuan Provincial High Court on No.20201. But this case is only part of the patent litigation of Geely and Weimar.

Author Zhang

Editor zhangyan

In the patent infringement dispute with Geely, Weimar Automobile won the first lawsuit.

In June 20 18, June 20 10 and August 20 19, Geely sued Weimar with different subjects. Recently, Yiou Automobile learned that the plaintiff Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry had withdrawn the filing of No.2018, and was approved by the Sichuan Provincial High Court in June 2020.

On February 12, relevant persons of Weimar Automobile told Yiou Automobile that the above news was true. At the same time, he said: "Weimar has not infringed on the intellectual property rights of others at any time and in any field. Weimar has always insisted on active research and development, independent development and emphasis on intellectual property protection. "

On June 5438+1October 65438+February, 2020, the Sichuan Higher People's Court published the first-instance civil ruling of the dispute between Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. and Weimar Zhongde Automobile Technology Chengdu Co., Ltd. and Xiang Jianming on China Judgment Document Network. The ruling stated that:

Plaintiff Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. and defendants Weimar Sino-German Automobile Technology Chengdu Co., Ltd., Xiang Jianming, Zhong Xingyuan, Kou, Weimar Automobile Technology Group Co., Ltd. and Weimar Smart Travel Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. filed a case on 201012. The plaintiff Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. filed an application for withdrawing the lawsuit with our hospital on February 25th, 20th/KLOC-0th/9th.

We believe that the plaintiff Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. voluntarily withdrew the lawsuit, which did not violate the law, and we allowed it.

According to the first paragraph of Article 145 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the ruling is as follows: Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. is allowed to withdraw the lawsuit. The case acceptance fee 139 1800 yuan, 695,900 yuan, shall be charged by half, and shall be borne by Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd.

Plaintiff Chengdu Plateau Automobile Industry Co., Ltd. is a first-class manufacturing subsidiary of Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd., which is mainly responsible for the research, development and manufacture of Geely Vision SUV (Global Hawk GX7). It is reported that Geely believes that part of the design of Weimar EX5 has copied Geely's long-term SUV models, but Weimar insists that all of them are independently developed.

The above lawsuit, which has been withdrawn by Geely, is only part of the patent litigation between Geely and Weimar.

2065438+On August 30th, 2009, Zhejiang Geely Holding Group and Geely Automobile Research Institute filed a lawsuit with the National High Court again in the name of infringing trade secrets. The defendants are Weimar Automobile and its four subsidiaries-Weimar Automobile Technology Group, Weimar Smart Travel Technology, Weimar Automobile Manufacturing Wenzhou Company and Weimar New Energy Automobile Sales Company. The amount of this claim is as high as 2 1 100 million yuan, which has attracted much attention from all walks of life.

The dispute in this case was formally filed in Shanghai High Court on September 20 17 19. Because the case was not heard in public, irrelevant personnel could not attend and the complaint was not made public. Therefore, it is also difficult for the outside world to obtain specific information about the case.

At present, the patent lawsuits of Geely and Weimar are still in the game. Some experts said that the biggest difficulty in this lawsuit lies in the proof. Unless the two parties reach an out-of-court settlement, the trial of the case is not expected to end in a short time.

Editor: zhangyan

This article comes from car home, the author of the car manufacturer, and does not represent car home's position.