(1) The product manufactured by the defendant and the product manufactured by the patented method belong to the same product;
(2) The products manufactured by the defendant are more likely to be manufactured by patented methods;
(3) The plaintiff made reasonable efforts to prove that the defendant used the patented method.
After the plaintiff completes the certificates listed in the preceding paragraph, the people's court may require the defendant to prove that the manufacturing method of its products is different from the patented method. Article 4 If the defendant claims the defense of legal source according to law, he shall provide evidence to prove that the accused infringing product or copy is legally obtained, including legal purchase channels, reasonable prices and direct suppliers.
If the source evidence of the accused infringing product or copy provided by the defendant is equivalent to its duty of reasonable care, it can be concluded that the defendant has completed the proof mentioned in the preceding paragraph, and it is presumed that he did not know that the accused infringing product or copy infringed intellectual property rights. The defendant's business scale, professional level and market trading habits can be used as evidence to determine his reasonable duty of care. Article 5 The plaintiff shall provide evidence for the following facts when bringing a lawsuit confirming non-infringement of intellectual property rights:
(a) the defendant issued an infringement warning to the plaintiff or filed an infringement complaint against the plaintiff;
(2) The time, manner and delivery time when the plaintiff exercises the right of action against the defendant;
(3) The defendant fails to bring a lawsuit within a reasonable time. Article 6 The parties need not provide evidence for the basic facts identified by administrative actions that have not been brought within the statutory time limit, or for some basic facts identified by administrative actions that have been confirmed by effective judgments, unless there is evidence to the contrary that can be overturned. Article 7 In order to discover or prove the infringement of intellectual property rights, the objects and bills obtained by the obligee from the accused infringer by himself or by entrusting others to buy infringing articles in the name of ordinary buyers can be used as evidence to sue the accused infringer for infringement.
The evidence formed by the accused infringer's infringement of intellectual property rights based on other people's behavior can be used as evidence for the obligee to sue him for infringement, except that the accused infringer infringes intellectual property rights only based on the obligee's evidence collection behavior. Article 8 The people's court shall not support the following evidence formed outside the territory of People's Republic of China (PRC) if the parties raise objections only on the grounds that the evidence has not been notarized or authenticated:
(1) It has been confirmed by a legally effective judgment of the people's court;
(2) It has been confirmed by the effective award of the arbitration institution;
(3) Public publications and patent documents that can be obtained from official or public channels;
(4) There is other evidence to prove the authenticity. Article 9 The people's court shall not support evidence formed outside the territory of People's Republic of China (PRC) in any of the following circumstances, if the parties raise objections only on the grounds that the evidence has not passed the authentication procedure:
(1) The dissenting party clearly recognizes the authenticity of the evidence;
(2) The other party provides witness testimony to confirm the authenticity of the evidence, and the witness clearly expresses his willingness to accept the punishment of perjury.
If the witness's perjury mentioned in the second paragraph of the preceding paragraph constitutes the situation stipulated in Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law, the people's court shall handle it according to law. Article 10 In accordance with the provisions of Articles 59 and 264 of the Civil Procedure Law, if the notarization, authentication or other certification procedures of the power of attorney have been completed in the procedure of first instance, the people's court may not require the above certification procedures of the power of attorney in subsequent proceedings. Article 11 The people's court shall examine the application for evidence preservation by the parties or interested parties in combination with the following factors:
(a) Whether the applicant has provided preliminary evidence for his claim;
(2) Whether the evidence can be collected by the applicant;
(three) the possibility of evidence being lost or difficult to obtain in the future and its influence on proving the facts to be proved;
(4) The influence of possible preservation measures on the evidence holders. Article 12 In preserving evidence, the people's court shall limit itself to effectively fixing the evidence, and minimize the damage to the value of the subject matter of preservation and the impact on the normal production and operation of the evidence holder.
Where the preservation of evidence involves technical solutions, preservation measures such as making on-site inspection records, drawing, taking photos, recording and video recording, and copying design and production drawings can be taken. Article 13 If the parties refuse to cooperate or hinder the preservation of evidence without justifiable reasons, resulting in the inability to preserve evidence, the people's court may hold them liable for adverse consequences. The people's court shall handle the case in accordance with the law if it constitutes the situation stipulated in Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law. Article 14 With regard to the evidence for which the people's court has taken preservation measures, the people's court may determine that if the parties dismantle the material evidence, tamper with the evidence materials or commit other acts of destroying the evidence without authorization, so that the evidence cannot be used, they shall bear adverse consequences. The people's court shall handle the case in accordance with the law if it constitutes the situation stipulated in Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law.