In order to correctly hear patent dispute cases, according to the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (hereinafter referred to as the General Principles of the Civil Law), the Patent Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Law), the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the following provisions are made: The people's courts shall accept the following patent dispute cases.
1. patent application right dispute case;
2. Patent ownership dispute cases;
3. Cases of contract disputes over the transfer of patent rights and patent application rights;
4. Cases of patent infringement disputes;
5. Patent dispute cases of counterfeiting others;
6. After the publication of the application for a patent for invention, but before the patent right is granted;
7. Disputes over rewards and remuneration of inventors and designers of service inventions;
8. Apply for stopping infringement and property preservation cases before litigation;
9. Disputes over the qualifications of inventors and designers;
10. Refusing to accept the decision of the Patent Reexamination Board to reject the application for reexamination;
1 1. A case that refuses to accept the decision made by the Patent Reexamination Board on the request for invalidation of the patent right;
12. Cases that are not satisfied with the compulsory licensing decision of the patent administrative department of the State Council;
13. The case that refuses to accept the compulsory license fee award of the patent administrative department of the State Council;
14. Cases that refuse to accept the administrative reconsideration decision of the State Council Patent Administration Department;
15. Cases that are dissatisfied with the administrative decision of the department in charge of patent work;
Other patent dispute cases. Patent dispute cases of first instance shall be under the jurisdiction of the intermediate people's courts where the people's governments of all provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government are located and the intermediate people's courts designated by the Supreme People's Court.
According to the actual situation, the Supreme People's Court can designate grass-roots people's courts to have jurisdiction over patent dispute cases of first instance. A lawsuit brought for patent infringement shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court in the place where the infringement occurred or the defendant's domicile.
Infringement includes: the place of manufacture, use, promised sale, sale or import of the product accused of infringing the patent right of invention or utility model; The place where the patented method is used, and the place where the products directly obtained according to the patented method are used, promised to be sold, sold and imported; The place where the act of manufacturing, promising to sell, selling and importing the patented product of design takes place; Places where counterfeiting other people's patents is carried out. The place where the infringement result of the above-mentioned infringement occurs. The plaintiff only brought a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the infringing product, but not against the seller. Where the place of manufacture of the infringing product is different from the place of sale, it shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place of manufacture; Where producers and sellers are sued as co-defendants, the people's court at the place of sale has jurisdiction.
If the seller is a branch of the manufacturer and the plaintiff sues the manufacturer of infringing products for manufacturing and selling at the place of sale, it shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court at the place of sale. The jurisdiction of the infringement lawsuit filed by the plaintiff based on the patent application filed a few days ago 1 993 65438+1October1and the method invention patent right granted by this application shall be determined with reference to the provisions of Articles 5 and 6 of these Provisions.
In the substantive trial of the above-mentioned cases, the people's court shall apply the provision that the patent right of method invention does not extend to the product according to law. Where a patent infringement lawsuit is filed against a utility model patent whose filing date is before 10, 2009 (excluding that date), the plaintiff may issue a search report made by the patent administration department of the State Council; Where a patent infringement lawsuit is filed against a utility model or design patent whose filing date is after 10, the plaintiff may issue a patent evaluation report made by the patent administration department of the State Council. The people's court may require the plaintiff to submit a search report or a patent evaluation report according to the needs of the trial. If the plaintiff fails to submit it within the time limit without justifiable reasons, the people's court may rule to suspend the lawsuit or order the plaintiff to bear the possible adverse consequences.
If the defendant in the dispute over the infringement of the patent right of utility model or design requests to suspend the lawsuit, he shall file a request for invalidation of the plaintiff's patent right within the defense period. In a dispute case accepted by the people's court, if the defendant requests to declare the patent right for utility model or design invalid during the defense period, the people's court shall suspend the lawsuit, but the lawsuit shall not be suspended under any of the following circumstances:
(a) the search report or patent evaluation report issued by the plaintiff did not find the reason that led to the invalidation of the patent right for utility model or design;
(2) The evidence provided by the defendant is sufficient to prove that the technology used by the defendant is known;
(3) The evidence or reasons for the defendant's request to declare the patent right invalid are obviously insufficient;
(4) Other circumstances in which the people's court considers that the lawsuit should not be suspended. When the people's court carries out property preservation of the patent right, it shall issue a notice of assistance in execution to the patent administration department of the State Council, stating the matters needing assistance in execution and the duration of patent preservation, and attach the ruling of the people's court.
The duration of the patent right shall be counted from the date when the patent administrative department of the State Council receives the notice of assistance in execution, and each time shall not exceed six months. Where the patent right still needs to be preserved, the people's court shall, before the expiration of the preservation period, serve a notice of assistance in execution to the patent administration department of the State Council. If it is not delivered before the expiration of the preservation period, it shall be deemed that the property preservation of the patent right is automatically lifted.
The people's court may take property preservation measures for the pledged patent right, and the priority of the pledgee is not affected by the preservation measures; The exclusive license contract signed by the patentee and the licensee shall not affect the property preservation of the patent right by the people's court.
The people's court shall not repeatedly preserve the patent right that has been preserved. The term "the scope of protection of the patent right for invention or utility model is subject to the content of the claim, and the description and drawings can be used to explain the content of the claim" in the first paragraph of Article 59 of the Patent Law means that the scope of protection of the patent right is subject to the scope determined by all technical features recorded in the claim, including the scope determined by features equivalent to the technical features.
Equivalent features refer to the realization of basically the same functions and effects as the recorded technical features by basically the same means, and ordinary technicians in this field can associate the features of alleged infringement without creative labor. The actual loss suffered by the obligee due to infringement as stipulated in Article 65 of the Patent Law can be calculated by multiplying the total sales reduction of patented products caused by infringement by the reasonable profit of each patented product. If it is difficult to determine the total number of sales reduced by the obligee, the product of the total number of infringing products sold in the market multiplied by the reasonable profit of each patented product can be regarded as the actual loss suffered by the obligee due to infringement.
The benefits obtained by the infringer due to infringement as stipulated in Article 65 of the Patent Law can be calculated by multiplying the total number of infringing products sold in the market by the reasonable profit of each infringing product. The benefits obtained by the infringer due to infringement are generally calculated according to the operating profit of the infringer, and can be calculated according to the sales profit for the infringer who is completely engaged in infringement. If the relevant judicial interpretations are inconsistent with these Provisions, these Provisions shall prevail.