Filter

Open

05

FEB

2021

业界新闻:

尼斯分类2021文本于1月1日起正式实施

11th Edition of Nice Classification Effective from January 1, 2021

世界知识产权组织要求,尼斯联盟各成员国于202111日起正式使用尼斯分类第十一版2021文本。申请日为202111日及以后的商标注册申请,在进行商品服务项目分类时适用尼斯分类新版本,申请日在此之前的商标注册申请适用尼斯分类原版本。

(来源:中国国家知识产权局商标局)

At the request of WIPO, all member states of the Nice Union shall adopt the 11th edition of the Nice Classification from January 1, 2021. The applications filed after this date shall adopt the new edition for reference of trademark classes for goods and services, and the applications prior to this date shall adopt from the previous one.

(Source: The Trademark Office of CNIPA)

中国国家知识产权局关于中韩优先权文件电子交换业务由双边平台迁移到WIPO DAS平台的公告

China-South Korea Electronic Priority Document Exchange Moved to WIPO DAS

根据中国国家知识产权局第196号公告,中国国家知识产权局自2014年1月1日起开通中韩双边优先权文件电子交换业务。现因韩方优先权业务迁移整合计划,该公告中涉及的双边交换渠道获取对方电子优先权文件服务将于2021年1月1日起停止。

为继续为中韩两国申请人提供电子优先权服务,中国国家知识产权局与韩国特许厅经协商一致,决定将中韩双边优先权文件电子交换业务切换至WIPO DAS平台。即,对于申请日在2021年1月1日(含)之后的申请,申请人希望获得中国国家知识产权局或韩国特许厅出具的电子优先权文件的,需按照WIPO DAS平台要求履行交存、查询手续。具体程序要求和操作指南参见世界知识产权组织网站http://www.wipo.int/das/en/,中国国家知识产权局网站https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2020/6/5/art_1549_99779.html以及韩国特许厅相关通知。

(来源:中国国家知识产权局网站)

The China National Intellectural Property Adminitrtion (CNIPA) recently announced the termination of the bilateral exchange of electronic priority documents between China and South Korea, which had came into use since January 1, 2014 according to No. 196 Announcement of CNIPA.

As agreed by both China and South Korea, the bilateral exchange of electronic priority documents shall be available on WIPO DAS platform. The applicants that file applications after January 1, 2021 shall follow the instructions of WIPO DAS platform for the request for electronic priority documents. More details can be found through WIPO website: http://www.wipo.int/das/en/.

(Source: CNIPA website)

中巴(西)专利审查高速路(PPH)新试点项目于2021年1月1日进入第二阶段

China-Brazil PPH Project Entering Second Phase on January 1, 2021

中巴(西)PPH新试点项目于202011日启动,为期五年,至20241231日止。根据中国国家知识产权局和巴西工业产权局的共同决定,中巴(西)PPH新试点项目于202111日进入第二阶段,项目截止日期不变。

中巴(西)PPH新试点项目进入第二阶段以后,申请人需按照新的项目指南文件向巴西工业产权局提出PPH请求,中国国家知识产权局项目指南继续适用。巴西工业产权局每年将接收600PPH请求(包括来自其所有PPH合作伙伴局的请求),每个申请人每周可提出1PPH请求,国际专利分类(IPC)同一部下每年将接受150PPH请求(包括来自其所有PPH合作伙伴局的请求)。

(来源:中国国家知识产权局)

The new China-Brazil PPH pilot project was launched on January 1, 2020 for a 5-year term ending on December 31, 2024 and as of January 1, 2021 the PPH pilot project entered the second phase.

After entering the second phase, the applicant shall submit the PPH request to the Brazilian Industrial Property Office (BIPO) in accordance with the office’s new PPH guideline, while that of the Chinese National Intellectual Property Office (CNIPA) remain unchanged. The BIPO will accept 600 PPH requests per year at max (including the requests from its PPH partner offices), each applicant can submit 1 PPH request per week; and the same department of the International Patent Classification (IPC) will accept 150 PPH requests per year (including requests from all of its PPH partner offices).

(Source: CNIPA website)

经典案例:

转败为胜!集佳代理重庆尚业医疗器械有限公司无效行政诉讼二审胜诉

A Turned Victory Won after Second Instance Litigation by Unitalen Client in Patent Infringement Defense

为了更好翻译,中文部分稍作修改

案件回顾

Case Summary

重庆尚业医疗器械有限公司因与广州中达福瑞医疗科技有限公司的侵害发明专利权纠纷一案,于2018年6月收到广州知识产权法院发来的《一审判决书》,责令其立即停止侵权行为,并一次性赔偿原告经济损失80万元。

Chongqing Shangye Medical Equipment Co., Ltd. received the judgement of the first instance from the Guangzhou IP Court in June 2018 concerning the dispute over the infringement of an invention patent right (ZL201410336696.5) vs Guangzhou Zhongda Furui Medical Technology Co., Ltd., which ordered it to cease infringement immediately and compensate the plaintiff 800,000 yuan for economic losses.

重庆尚业医疗器械有限公司由此于2018年8月委托集佳提出上诉,我方在针对涉案专利()提起无效宣告请求的同时,在侵权诉讼二审中提出专利无效抗辩并申请中止二审审理。但遗憾的是,此侵权诉讼二审中的中止请求没有得到支持。2018年11月,广东省高级人民法院发出了《二审判决书》,维持原判。判决生效后,广州中达公司向广州市中级人民法院提出了《强制执行申请》。

Chongqing Shangye Medical Devices Co., Ltd. therefore entrusted Unitalen to handle the case in August 2018. Our attorneys then filed the request for invalidation of the involved patenta as well as filed the patent invalidation defense and applied for a halt on the infringement litigation of second instance. Unfortunately, the request for the halt was not supported. In November 2018, the Guangdong Higher People's Court of second instance issued the judgement that upheld the original judgment. Guangzhou Zhongda Company also filed the "Application for Enforcement" to the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court.

随后,集佳代理人在口头审理中向国家知识产权局详细说明了涉案专利权不具备创造性的理由及证据,并于2019年2月收到国家知识产权局发出的第39057号《无效决定书》,宣告涉案专利权全部涉诉权利要求无效!

To continue, Unitalen attorneys presented the reasons and envidences to the CNIPA Patent Office as to why the involved patent is lacking inventiveness, and we received the No. 39057 "Invalidation Decision" issued by the CNIPA in February 2019, ruling that all claims of the patent right involved are invalid!

收到《无效决定书》后,我方将其作为新证据提交至再审案件中,最高院于2020年5月裁定维持上述《无效决定》,认定涉诉权利要求无效,裁定中止原判决的执行。同时,迫于上述《无效决定书》的压力,原告广州中达公司于2019年3月主动撤回了前述《执行申请书》。至此,集佳代理重庆尚业公司赢得了该专利无效行政诉讼的最终胜利,并成功助力其转败为胜、免除专利侵权责任及巨额赔偿!

We then submitted the decision as new evidence to the retrial case in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in May 2020 to maintain the "Invalidation Decision", confirming the claims involved are invalid, and ruled to suspend the execution of the original judgment . Meanwhile, the plaintiff, under the pressure of the “Invalidation Decision”, voluntarily withdrew the aforementioned "Application for Enformece" in March 2019. Thus, our client won the final victory in this patent invalidation administrative litigation with all patent infringement liability and huge compensation excempted.

律师点评:

Comments

挑战专利权的有效性是专利侵权诉讼案件中被告重要的反制手段。如在一审中能将涉案专利权无效,则权利人将被迫撤诉或法院裁定驳回起诉;如在二审中能将涉案专利权无效,则二审法院通常撤销一审判决,裁定驳回起诉;即便二审结束后将涉案专利权无效,仍有机会转败为胜。

Challenging the validity of a patent right is an important countermeasure for defendant in patent infringement lawsuit. If the patent right involved can be invalidated in the first instance, the right holder will be forced to withdraw the lawsuit or the court will rule to reject the lawsuit; if the patent right involved can be invalidated in the second instance, the court of second instance usually revokes the first instance judgment and ruled to reject the lawsuit; even after the second instance, if the patent right involved can be invalidated, there is still chance to turn defeat into victory.

集佳代理LG生活健康“后WHOO”系列唇膏外观设计专利侵权案胜诉

Unitalen Client LG Won Its WHOO Brand Lipstick Container Design Patent Infringement Case

案件背景:

株式会社LG生活健康是全球知名的化妆品公司,其“后WHOO”系列“拱辰享美奢冠鎏金唇膏”一经推出便为广大女性受众所喜爱。该系列唇膏的容器为涉案专利,分为管体和盖体两部分。此涉案专利于201766日申请,授权公告日为20171215日,优先权日为2017524日。

Unitalen client LG Life Health Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the plaintiff”) is a world-renowned cosmetics company. Its WHOO brand Luxury lipstick series is popular among a wide range of female customers since it came out into the market. The patent involved in this case is the container of this series of lipsticks, which comprises two parts: a tube body and a lid. The patent was filed on June 6, 2017 and granted on December 15, 2017 with the priority date as May 24, 2017.

本次被控侵权产品是广州奥希尼化妆品有限公司推出的TUTU品牌唇膏。奥西尼公司旗下有多款彩妆品牌,如HOLDLIVETUTU3GSNYN等。

The product alleged of infringement in this case is the TUTU brand lipstick launched by Guangzhou Aoxini Cosmetics Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “the defendant”).

涉案专利产品名称为唇膏容器,用途为容纳,例如化妆品等各种物品,而被诉侵权产品为唇膏,两者在国际外观设计分类表均属于28-02类,为种类相同的产品。

In comparison, the patent involved is a lipstick container, which is used to hold various items such as cosmetics, while the alleged product is a lipstick. However, both of them fall under 28-02 category on the International Design Classification Table, so they are of the same type of products.

根据涉案专利的专利权评价报告,涉案专利相对于专利权评价报告中检索得到的对比设计1以及其他现有设计,其主要区别在于:(1)管体形状,即,涉案专利的管体设置成子弹头形状,与现有设计中的管体形状相比具有明显差异,构成本专利的具有创新性的设计要点;(2)盖体的形状和图,即,涉案专利的盖体与现有设计的主要区别在于其圆柱形上部与截面呈两腰为内凹曲线的梯形的下部的组合,上部设计有镂空雕花图案,下部光滑无图案。

According to the patent right evaluation report of the involved patent, the main difference between the involved patent and other existing designs is:

1) The shape of the tube body, that is, it’s in the shape of the bullet, which is completely different from other existing design and thus constitutes the essence of innovative design;

2) The shape and pattern of the lid, that is, it’s a combination of a cylindrical upper part and the lower part of a trapezoid with a concave curve in the cross section. The upper part is designed with a hollow carved pattern, and the lower part is smooth without a pattern.

经过比对,被诉侵权产品设计与涉案专利的确存在以下两点区别,即:(1)盖体上镂空雕花的具体图案略有不同;(2)顶部穿孔处是否连接有唇刷。

To compare the patent involved and the alleged product, it’s true that there are two differences in between, 1) The specific pattern of the hollow carving on the lid is slightly different; 2) whether there is a lip brush connected to the top perforation.

但事实上,上述区别(1)属于一般消费者不易注意的细微差别,对整体视觉效果不具显著影响。主要原因在于:第一,上述区别属于惯常的设计方法,未产生显著的视觉效果;第二,涉案外观设计产品设计空间大,上述区别属于一般消费者不易察觉的微小差异,从整体来看,图案部分所占比例较小,不易引起一般消费者的注意。

However, the first difference mentioned above is too for ordinary consumers to notice and has no significant impact on the overall visual effect, because: first, it’s a customary design method and does not produce a significant visual effect; secondly, the difference is relatively a very small difference vs other areas of the design, i.e., the pattern occupies a small proportion and is not easy to attract the attention of ordinary consumers.

对于上述区别(2),由于其系额外增加的设计特征,不属于涉案外观设计专利的保护范围,不应纳入侵权对比中,并且区别(2)涉及一种唇刷,其属于功能性的特征,因此也应该将其排除在涉案外观设计专利的保护范围之外。

As for the second difference, because it is an additional design feature, it does not belong to the scope of protection of the involved design patent and should not be included in the infringement comparison; in addition, this difference involves a lip brush, which is a functional feature Therefore, it should be excluded from the scope of protection of the involved patent.

由此观之,被诉侵权产品之设计落入了涉案专利的保护范围,被控侵权行为构成了专利侵权。遂LG生活健康委托集佳对奥西尼公司侵犯“唇膏容器”外观设计专利提出上诉。

Therefore, the design of the alleged infringing product falls within the protection scope of the patent involved and constitutes patent infringement. Our client LG Life Health Co. Ltd. thus filed the infringement litigation against the defendant.

法院判决:

Court’s Judgement

近日,广州知识产权法院针对此案作出一审判决,认为LG生活健康关于奥希尼公司生产、销售的被控侵权产品之外观设计落入LG生活健康涉案专利权保护范围的主张成立,同时判决奥希尼公司赔偿LG生活健康经济损失20万元。

Recently, the Guangzhou IP Court made the judgement of first-instance for this case, which found that our client’s claim established and ordered the defendant to compensate 200,000 yuan for our client’s economic losses.

集佳新闻:

集佳参与编写的《海外重点国家商标维权指南》在商标节正式发布

The Guidelines for the Protection of Trademark Rights in Key Overseas Countries with Unitalen Participation was Published

127日,由国家知识产权局知识产权保护司组织、中华商标协会承担编写的《海外重点国家商标维权指南》在第十二届中国国际商标品牌节上正式发布。国家知识产权局知识产权保护司副司长曹红英、中华商标协会会长马夫出席发布仪式,并为集佳知识产权等项目团队成员颁发了荣誉证书。

On December 7, the "Guidelines for the Protection of Trademark Rights in Key Overseas Countries" was published at the 12th China International Trademark and Brand Festival. The writing of the Guidelines was organized by the CNIPA IP Protection and undertaken by the China Trademark Association and other participating law firms. At the festival, CNIPA and CTA officials issued the certificates of honor to the Guidelines writing project team members including our law firm.

集佳合伙人赵雷律师出席AIPPI 中国分会版权热点论坛并发表主题演讲

Unitalen Partner Delivered Keynote Speech at AIPPI China Copyright Forum

2020年12月12日,第五届国际保护知识产权协会(AIPPI)中国分会版权热点论坛在京举行,集佳合伙人赵雷律师作为AIPPI中国分会版权专业委员会委员,应邀出席论坛并发表了主题演讲。

赵雷律师围绕“网络游戏的版权保护路径”这一主题,通过解读网游版权保护相关案例,深刻分析了当前国内网络游戏行业市场规模、网络游戏用户规模、游戏细分市场状况、游戏细分市场状况等问题,并总结了网络游戏版权保护的相关法律规定及网络游戏的版权保护路径。赵雷律师的演讲得到了参会代表们的积极反响。

On December 12, 2020, the 5th AIPPI ChinaCopyright Hotspot Forum was held in Beijing. As a member of the Copyright Professional Committee of AIPPI China, Unitalen partner Mr. Zhao Lei, was invited to attend the forum and delivered the keynote speech on the theme of "copyright protection of online games". The speech provided insight on the online games’ markets and corresponding laws and regulations through which how the businesses can devise the best copyright protection strategies and pathways.

集佳10位合伙人入选“首都知识产权服务行业师资库” 助力行业人才建设

Ten Unitalen Partners Selected into Beijing IP Industry Teacher List

近日,首都知识产权代理行业师资库师资名单公布,集佳合伙人董敏、张春水、舒艳君、王宝筠、郑斌、杜燕霞、李新燕、王逸君、郭化雨、刘雯鑫等10位代理人入选,他们将代表集佳参与到北京市知识产权人才建设中去。

Recently, the Capital IP Agency Industry Teachers List was published and 10 Unitalen partners were selected into the list and they will represent Unitalen to participate in the development of IP talents in Beijing.

集佳荣膺2019-2020年度“北京市优秀专利代理机构(领军机构)”称号|专利代理师薛晨光获评“杰出代理师”

Unitalen Awarded as Beijing Excellent Patent Agency Again

近日,北京市专利代理师协会公布了2019-2020年度北京市优秀专利代理机构和优秀专利代理师评选结果。集佳再度被评为“北京市优秀专利代理机构(领军机构)”;同时,专利代理师薛晨光荣膺2019-2020年度北京市优秀专利代理师“杰出代理师”称号。

Recently, the Beijing Association of Patent Attorneys announced the results of the 2019-2020 Beijing Excellent Patent Agency and Excellent Patent Attorney selection. Unitalen was once again awarded as "Beijing Excellent Patent Agency (Leading Agency)"; at the same time, our patent attorney, Xue Chenguang, was awarded the title of "Outstanding Agent" of year 2019-2020.

About the Firm

Unitalen Attorneys at Law
Address 7th Floor, Scitech Place, No. 22 Jian Guo Men Wai Ave., Beijing, 100004 P. R. China
Tel 86-10-5920 8888
Fax 86-10-5920 8588
Email mail@unitalen.com
Link www.unitalen.com

Related Newsletters

05
FEB
2021
05
FEB
2021
業界ニュース ニース分類2021年版が1月1日より正式に実施  世界知的所有...

Read More

06
JAN
2021
06
JAN
2021
業界ニュース: 新たに改正された「中華人民共和国著作権法」が2021年6月...

Read More

06
JAN
2021
06
JAN
2021
业界新闻: 新修改的《中华人民共和国著作权法》于2021年6月1日起施行 The...

Read More

04
DEC
2020
04
DEC
2020
业界新闻: 新修改的《中华人民共和国专利法》将于明年6月1日正式实施 N...

Read More

04
DEC
2020
04
DEC
2020
業界ニュース: 新たに改正された「中華人民共和国専利法」が来年6月1日...

Read More

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4