Filter

Open

12

NOV

2021

Newsletter: Volume 9 (2021) Chinese IP Information

(English and Chinese)

  • The influence of the modified claims in the parallel invalidation procedure
  • Global Innovation Index ReportChina rises to No.12
  • IP legislation involving big data, AI and genetic technology will be accelerated in China
  • Overview of European patent applications by Chinese enterprises

The influence of the modified claims in the parallel invalidation procedure—(2020) Supreme People’s Court Final Administrative Judgment No. 93

The main takeaway of the trial

In the examination procedure for multiple invalidation requests of the same patent right, if the patentee modifies a claim in one of the procedures and the modification is accepted by the CNIPA, for the administrative case of patent right confirmation examined by pre-modified claim and caused by the decision being sued later, it is unnecessary to continue the trial without basis for examination.

In the meantime, the relevant decision sued later should be revoked by the people's court, but there is no need to order the CNIPA to make a new decision.

Case Introduction

In the administrative dispute case over the invalidation of utility model patent rights with the appellant Guy A. Shaked Investments Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Guy Company, the patentee) and the appellee CNIPA, and the third party in the original trial, Shenzhen Nasiwei Electronics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Nasiwei Company, the invalidation requester), the utility model patent named "Hair Straightening Brush" with the application number 201390000237.9 (hereinafter referred to as the patent) was involved.

The CNIPA made the No. 30338 Invalidation Request Examination Decision (hereinafter referred to as the sued decision), declaring the patent invalid.

The Guy Company refused to accept the sued decision and filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (hereinafter referred to as the court of first instance), requesting an order to revoke the decision of the sued decision and ordering the CNIPA to make a new decision.

The court of first instance held that the basis for the trial of the sued decision was the claims at the time of the announcement of the patent authorization, however, the Guy Company revised the abovementioned claims in the other invalidation procedure for the patent, and the modified claims have been approved by the CNIPA. Therefore, the trial of the sued decision didn’t involve substantive meaning, and the litigation request of the Guy Company was dismissed by the judgment.

The Guy Company refused to accept the decision and appealed to the Supreme People’s Court, claiming that in the case in which the two invalidation decisions concerning the patent has not taken effect, the other invalidation decision of the patent did not cause any change for examination basis of the sued decision in this case. Therefore, the sued decision of this case shall be made substantive trial.

On December 3, 2020, the Supreme People's Court revoked the first-instance judgment and the sued decision, and rejected other appeals of Guy Company.

Typical meaning

In the second instance of the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Court held that in the examination procedures for multiple invalidation requests involving the same patent right, if the patentee has modified the claims in one of the procedures, and the amendment conforms the provisions of the Patent Law, it shall be regarded as the patentee's waiver for the original claims.

The disposal of the patentee's rights will inevitably have a substantial impact on other uncompleted administrative procedures for the examination of invalidation requests involving the same patent right and subsequent administrative litigation procedures.

In the invalidation request procedure involved in the invalidation decision of the other case, Guy Company, as the patentee, revised the claims including that deleting claims 1, 4 and 9, and merging 4 and 9 into a new claim 1, with the corresponding revision of serial numbers and citation relationships of the rest claims, which have been accepted by the CNIPA.

The above-mentioned amendments constitute a waiver of the claims before the amendments, and it will definitely have a substantial impact on the invalidation request procedure that is currently in progress, that is, examination procedure for the invalidation request involved in this case.

In this case, the examination procedure for the invalidation request in this case should no longer continue the examination and make a decision based on the claims at the time of the publication of the patent authorization, that is, the claims before the amendment.

The invalidation decision of the other case was made on October 18, 2016, declaring that the patent rights were all invalid, and based on the claims at the time of the authorization announcement, that is, before the amendment, the CNIPA made the sued decision of the case on 19th of the same month, declaring the patent all to be invalid.

When the sued decision of this case was made, there was no need to continue the examination due to the nonexistence of examination basis, so the sued decision that has been made should be revoked, and the CNIPA had no need to make a new decision.

The trial basis of the first-instance judgment regarding the sued decision has changed, and the trial for the sued decision is no longer substantively correct, in view of that it has not handled the sued decision of this case, the sued decision shall be corrected.

From: The Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People’s Court

September 7, 2021

Global Innovation Index ReportChina rises to No.12

On September 20, Beijing time, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) issued the 2021Global Innovation Index Report (hereinafter referred to as Report), which shows that China ranks 12th, up 2 places from 2020. The Report spoke highly of China’s progress in the innovation, and emphasized the importance of government decision-making and incentive measures for innovation promotion.

China, since 2013, has been steadily rising in the ranking of the Global Innovation Index for 9 consecutive years, with a strong upward momentum.

In the aspect of sub-item index, from the perspective of innovation input, China’s trade, competition and market scale, knowledge-based workers and other two categories of indicators are in a leading role in the world. In the aspect of segmenting index, PISA scale scores of reading, mathematics and science, domestic market scale, proportion of companies providing formal training, domestic industry diversification, average expenditure of the top 3 global R&D companies, average score of the top 3 QS universities, industrial cluster development, proportion of total capital formation in GDP, proportion of corporate funding GERD were all top-ranked ones.

The segmenting index including China's domestic patent and trademark applications, and the proportion of creative product exports in total trade have achieved the leading role in the world. In 2021, the broad index of knowledge communication has made remarkable progress, particularly the subdivision of the proportion of intellectual property revenue in total trade has made continuous progress, which indicates that China is gradually transforming from a major power of intellectual property introduction to a great power of intellectual property invention.

The Report shows that Switzerland has been ranked first for the 11th consecutive year, Sweden, the United States, the United Kingdom, and South Korea ranked second to fifth; China ranked 12th, ranking first among the middle-income economies, surpassing advanced economies such as Japan, Israel, and Canada.

Since the "Global Innovation Index Report" was issued in 2007, it has become a wind vane for measuring innovation and the cornerstone for governments to make economic decisions. More and more governments are conducting systematic analysis of their annual selection results and formulating countermeasures to improve its performance.

From: CNIPA

September 21, 2021

IP legislation involving big data, AI and genetic technology will be accelerated in China

China will speed up the legislation of intellectual property rights in big data, AI, genetic technology and other new fields and new formats, and establish and improve intellectual property protection regulations for new technologies, new industries, new formats and new models.

The other contents of the legal system are as follows: revising the patent law, trademark law, copyright law and protection regulations for new plant varieties based on facts, exploring the establishment of exclusive laws and regulations for geographical indications and industrial designs, and strengthening unified protection system for geographical indications with the coordination of special protection and trademark protection, improving integrated circuit layout design laws and regulations; carrying out the formulation and modification of laws and regulations in strengthening the protection of trade secrets, completing the improvement of the legal system for regulating intellectual property abuses, as well as the anti-monopoly and anti-unfair competition legislation related to intellectual property; amending the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Science and Technology Progress; researching and establishing then improving a special procedure legal system that conforms to the laws of intellectual property trials; comprehensively establishing and implementing a punitive compensation system for infringement, and increasing compensation for damages.

In the aspect of constructing IP regulations and systems with prompt response and reasonable protection in emerging fields and specific fields, besides establishing and improving intellectual property rights protection rules for new technologies, new industries, new formats, and new models, in the meantime, explore and improve the IP protection system in the field of Internet; study and construct data intellectual property protection rules; improve the intellectual property rights and legal systems with source opening; research and improve intellectual property rights protection regulations for algorithms, business methods, and artificial intelligence output.

In addition, enhance constructing the acquisition and benefits sharing system such as genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folk literature and art, promoting the collection and sorting, transformation and use of intangible cultural heritage. Drive the effective connection between traditional Chinese medicine and modern intellectual property systems. Further perfect the comprehensive protection system of traditional Chinese medicine intellectual property rights, build a special examination and protection mechanism for traditional Chinese medicine patents, promoting the inheritance and innovation of traditional Chinese medicine.

From: China News Net

September 22, 2021

Overview of European patent applications by Chinese enterprises

For a long time, many Chinese enterprises have invested in European multi-country markets, and they effectively protect independent innovation technologies through European patents, which is a strategic component of them.

Pursuant to the "Annual Report 2018-Statistics List" issued by the European Patent Office, China ranks sixth among the source countries for European patent applications.

Fig.1 European patent applications by China from 2000 to 2018

Main Technical Fields for European Patent Application

Table 1 The top 10 International Patent Classification (IPC) technical fields of European patent applications from 2000 to 2015

With the European Patent Gazette search tool, we searched the IPC of patent applications filed in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015, and analyzed all patent applications filed in 2000 and 2005 as well as the first 1,500 patent applications filed in 2010 and 2015.

Fig.2 The evolution trend of the top 10 International Patent Classification (IPC) in European patent applications from 2000 to 2015

It can be seen from the main technical fields related to the international patent sub-categories listed in Figure 2 that the patent applications related to the field of information and communication technology take a dominate place. In accordance with the search of the top-ranked sub-category A61K (medical, dental or cosmetic preparations), the number of European patent applications related to the pharmaceutical industry is relatively high. Due to its correlation with the invention of new active pharmaceutical compounds, the said sub-category is usually for patent application with the sub-category A61P and the sub-category C07D.

Fig.3 The ranking of top 10 Chinese applicants in the European Patent Office from 2000 to 2015

Figure 3 lists the top 10 Chinese applicants for European patents. Through the statistics of the European Patent Bulletin Search Database, analyze the patent applications filed by each Chinese applicant in 2000 and 2005 and the first 1,500 patent applications filed in 2010 and 2015. Among them, the patent application data of the top 3 Chinese applicants-Huawei, ZTE and BOE, strongly confirms that patent applications related to information and communication technology, telecommunications and Internet of Things technology take the lead in European patent applications. The number of patent applications of the top 10 Chinese patent applicants accounted for 77% of the total number of patent applications in the same period.

As a subjective issue, the evaluation of the quality of patent applications needs to clarify the quality indicators used. In this study, we analyzed the authorization proportion, rejection proportion, and withdrawal proportion of European patent applications filed in certain years. In order to learn about the quality variation trend of European patent applications from China, we analyzed the patent applications filed by Chinese patent applicants in 2000 and 2005 and the first 1,500 patent applications filed in 2010 and 2015, so that from the European Patent Bulletin Database, we collected data results about the patent application authorization rate, patent application rejection rate, patent application withdrawal rate, and patent application regarded as withdrawal rate , as shown in Fig.4.

Fig.4 Evaluation results of quality index for European patent applications originating from China in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015

In combination of the above data, it shows that the quality of European patent applications from China has been improving since 2000, in which compared with 2000, the patent authorization rate of Chinese applicants in 2015 increased by 21%; in the same period, the total proportion of decisions related to withdrawal decreased by 61%, it means that the quality of European patent applications originating from China has been significantly improved.

Conclusion

We can learn from the European patent application data field by Chinese enterprises as patent applicants that Chinese patent applicants are increasingly applying European patent applications to provide more sufficient patent protection for their technologies. Most importantly, the study indicates that the absolute index rate of Chinese applicants related to European patent authorization is showing a continuous upward trend, which benefited from China’s strong investment in the talent teams (for example, patent attorneys and patent examiners, etc.) required by the CNIPA to build and maintain the effective implementation of the patent system, as well as the vigorous Chinese enterprises continuously exploring overseas market Chinese companies. Chinese enterprises are now developing their technical protection solutions in specific technical fields, especially in the fields of digital communications and computer technology.

From: China IP

September 24, 2021

  • 平行无效宣告程序中权利要求修改的影响
  • 《全球创新指数报告》:中国升至第12
  • 中国将加快大数据、人工智能、基因技术等知识产权立法
  • 中国企业的欧洲专利申请概

平行无效宣告程序中权利要求修改的影响——(2020)最高法知行终93

【裁判要旨】

同一专利权的多个无效宣告请求审查程序中,专利权人在其中一个程序中修改了权利要求且该修改被国家知识产权局接受的,以修改前的权利要求为审查基础的在后被诉决定引发的专利确权行政案件,因审查基础已不复存在而无继续审理之必要。

此时,人民法院应当撤销有关在后被诉决定,但无需判令国家知识产权局重新作出决定。

【基本案情】

上诉人盖组织管理及投资股份有限公司(Guy A. Shaked Investments Ltd.)(以下简称盖组织公司,专利权人)与被上诉人国家知识产权局、原审第三人深圳纳斯威电子有限公司(以下简称纳斯威公司。无效请求人)实用新型专利权无效行政纠纷案中,涉及申请号为201390000237.9、名称为“头发矫直刷”的实用新型专利(以下简称本专利)。

上半年,我国发明专利授权 33.9 万件。

盖组织公司不服被诉决定,向北京知识产权法院(以下简称一审法院)提起诉讼,请求判令撤销被诉决定并责令国家知识产权局重新作出决定。

一审法院认为,被诉决定审理基础为本专利授权公告时的权利要求,而盖组织公司在针对本专利的另一无效程序中修改了前述权利要求且该修改后的权利要求已被国家知识产权局接受,因此被诉决定的审理已不具有实质意义,判决驳回盖组织公司的诉讼请求。

盖组织公司不服,向最高人民法院提起上诉,主张在涉及本专利的两个无效决定均未生效的情况下,本专利的另一无效决定并未导致本案被诉决定的审查基础发生变化,仍应对本案被诉决定作实质审理。

最高人民法院于2020123日撤销一审判决和被诉决定,驳回盖组织公司的其他上诉请求。

【裁判意见】

最高人民法院二审认为,在涉及同一专利权的多个无效宣告请求审查程序中,专利权人在其中一个程序中对权利要求进行了修改,且该修改符合专利法规定的,应当视为专利权人对原权利要求的放弃。

专利权人对其权利的处分,必然会对其他尚未完成的、涉及同一专利权无效宣告请求审查行政程序及后续的行政诉讼程序产生实质性影响。

在另案无效决定涉及的无效宣告请求程序中,盖组织公司作为专利权人修改了权利要求书且已被国家知识产权局接受,修改方式为删除权利要求149,将权利要求149合并为新的权利要求1,并相应修改其余权利要求的编号和引用关系。

上述修改构成对其修改前的权利要求的放弃,必然会对同时正在进行中的无效宣告请求程序,即本案涉及的无效宣告请求审查程序产生实质性影响。

在此情况下,本案的无效请求审查程序不应再基于本专利授权公告时的权利要求书即修改前的权利要求继续审查并作出决定。

另案无效决定于20161018日作出,宣告本专利权全部无效,而国家知识产权局又基于授权公告时即修改前的权利要求于同月19日作出本案被诉决定宣告本专利全部无效。

本案被诉决定作出时,其审查基础实质上已不复存在而无继续审查之必要,故应对已作出的被诉决定予以撤销,且国家知识产权局也无需重新作出决定。

一审判决关于被诉决定的审理基础已经发生变化,针对被诉决定的审理已不具有实质意义的认定正确,但未对本案被诉决定作出处理,予以纠正。

摘自:最高人民法院知识产权法庭

202197

《全球创新指数报告》:中国升至第12

北京时间920日,世界知识产权组织(WIPO)发布《2021年全球创新指数报告》(下称《报告》),中国排名第12位,较2020年上升2位。《报告》高度评价中国在创新方面取得的进步,并强调了政府决策和激励措施对于促进创新的重要性。

中国自2013年起,全球创新指数排名连续9年稳步上升,上升势头强劲。

在分项指标方面,从创新投入看,中国的贸易、竞争和市场规模,知识型工人等2项大类指标均处于全球领先地位,阅读、数学和科学PISA量表得分,国内市场规模,提供正规培训的公司占比,国内产业多元化,全球研发公司前三位平均支出,QS高校排名前三位平均分,产业集群发展情况,资本形成总额在GDP中的占比,企业供资GERD占比等细分指标排名靠前。

中国本国人专利、商标申请,创意产品出口在贸易总额中的占比等细分指标均实现全球领先。2021年,知识传播这一大类指标进步明显,特别是知识产权收入在贸易总额中的占比这一细分指标持续进步,表明中国正逐步从知识产权引进大国向知识产权创造大国转变。

《报告》显示,瑞士连续第11年位居榜首,瑞典、美国、英国、韩国分列第2位至5位;中国位列第12位,位居中等收入经济体首位,超过日本、以色列、加拿大等发达经济体。

2007年《全球创新指数报告》发布以来,目前已成为衡量创新的风向标,并成为各国政府制定经济决策的基石,越来越多的政府对其年度评选结果展开系统性分析,并制定应对措施以改善其表现。

摘自:国家知识产权局

2021921

中国将加快大数据、人工智能、基因技术等知识产权立法

中国将加快大数据、人工智能、基因技术等新领域新业态知识产权立法,并建立健全新技术、新产业、新业态、新模式知识产权保护规则。

法律体系构建内容还包括:根据实际及时修改专利法、商标法、著作权法和植物新品种保护条例,探索制定地理标志、外观设计等专门法律法规,健全专门保护与商标保护相互协调的统一地理标志保护制度,完善集成电路布图设计法规;制定修改强化商业秘密保护方面的法律法规,完善规制知识产权滥用行为的法律制度以及与知识产权相关的反垄断、反不正当竞争等领域立法;修改科学技术进步法;研究建立健全符合知识产权审判规律的特别程序法律制度;全面建立并实施侵权惩罚性赔偿制度,加大损害赔偿力度等。

在构建响应及时、保护合理的新兴领域和特定领域知识产权规则体系方面,在建立健全新技术、新产业、新业态、新模式知识产权保护规则的同时,探索完善互联网领域知识产权保护制度;研究构建数据知识产权保护规则;完善开源知识产权和法律体系;研究完善算法、商业方法、人工智能产出物知识产权保护规则。

此外,加强遗传资源、传统知识、民间文艺等获取和惠益分享制度建设,加强非物质文化遗产的搜集整理和转化利用。推动中医药传统知识保护与现代知识产权制度有效衔接,进一步完善中医药知识产权综合保护体系,建立中医药专利特别审查和保护机制,促进中医药传承创新发展。

摘自:中国新闻网

2021922

中国企业的欧洲专利申请概况

长期以来,许多中国企业在欧洲多国市场进行投资,通过欧洲专利来有效地保护自主创新技术,是这些企业的战略组成部分。

根据欧洲专利局发布的《2018年年度报告——统计数据一览表》,在递交欧洲专利申请的来源国中,中国在专利申请量上位居第六。

1 2000年至2018年间源自中国的欧洲专利申请量

欧洲专利申请的主要技术领域

1 2000年至2015年间欧洲专利申请中前10项国际专利分类(IPC)所属技术领域

我们通过欧洲专利公报检索工具,对2000年、2005年、2010年和2015年提交的专利申请的国际专利分类(IPC)进行检索,并分析了2000年和2005年提交的全部专利申请以及2010年和2015年提交的前1500件专利申请。

2 2000年至2015年间欧洲专利申请中前10项国际专利分类(IPC)的演变趋势

通过图2列出的国际专利子类相关的主要技术领域,可知与信息和通信技术领域有关的专利申请占主导地位。根据对排名靠前的子类A61K(医用、牙科用或梳妆用的配制品)的检索,可知制药业相关的欧洲专利申请量较高,该子类通常与子类A61P和子类C07D一起进行专利申请,因其与新型活性药物化合物的发明相关。

3 2000年至2015年间欧洲专利局十大中国申请人排名情况

3列出了欧洲专利的十大中国申请人。通过欧洲专利公报检索数据库的统计,分析每一位中国申请人在2000年和2005年提交的专利申请以及在2010年和2015年提交的前1500件专利申请。其中,排名前三位的中国申请人——华为、中兴和京东方的专利申请数据,有力地证实了与信息和通信技术、电信和物联网技术相关的专利申请在欧洲专利申请中占据着主导地位。十大中国专利申请人的专利申请数量约占同期专利申请总量的77%

评估专利申请的质量是一个主观问题,需要明确所采用的质量指标。在本研究中,我们分析了在某些年份提交的欧洲专利申请的授权比例、驳回比例和撤回比例。为了解来自中国的欧洲专利申请的质量变化趋势,通过分析中国专利申请人在2000年和2005年提交的专利申请以及在2010年和2015年提交的前1500件专利申请,我们从欧洲专利公报检索数据库中收集到了有关专利申请授权率、专利申请驳回率、专利申请撤回率和专利申请视为撤回率的数据结果(如图4)。

4 在2000年、2005年、2010年和2015年源自中国的欧洲专利申请质量指标评估结果

结论

我们可以从中国企业作为专利申请人所递交的欧洲专利申请数据了解到,中国专利申请人正越来越多地通过欧洲专利申请途径,对其技术进行更为充分的专利保护。最重要的是,本研究表明,中国申请人在与欧洲专利授权相关的绝对指标率上正呈现出持续上升的趋势。这得益于中国对其国家知识产权局建设及维系专利制度有效实施所需人才队伍组织(如专利代理师和专利审查员等)的有力投资,当然也得益于那些不断寻求拓展海外市场、充满活力的中国企业。中国企业如今正在特定技术领域不断发展其技术保护解决方案,特别是在数字通信和计算机技术领域。

摘自:中国知识产权杂志

2021924

About the Firm

Ge Cheng & Co Ltd.
Address Level 19, Tower E3, The Towers, Oriental Plaza, No 1 East Chang An Avenue, Beijing 100073, China.
Tel 86-10-8518 8598
Fax 86-10-8518 3600
Email davidcheng@gechengip.com , info@gechengip.com
Link www.gechengip.com

Related Newsletters

28
OCT
2021
28
OCT
2021
Newsletter: Volume 8 (2021) Chinese IP Information (English and Chinese) The main statistics of...

Read More

10
SEP
2021
10
SEP
2021
Newsletter: Volume 7 (2021) Chinese IP Information (English and Chinese) Interpretation of Poli...

Read More

10
SEP
2021
10
SEP
2021
「医薬品特許紛争の早期解決メカニズムの実施のための措置(試行)」...

Read More

27
JUL
2021
27
JUL
2021
ブロックチェーン技術は、版権の保護と運用のために科学的および技術...

Read More

27
JUL
2021
27
JUL
2021
Newsletter: Volume 6 (2021) Chinese IP Information (English and Chinese) Block-chain technolo...

Read More

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6