上海某公司就一手機攝影鏡頭的驅動裝置在中國獲得發明專利權,該公司認為日本某電子公司在中國的子公司制造的透鏡驅動元件侵犯了其發明專利權,便向法院提起專利侵權之訴,要求被告停止侵權行為,并賠償原告經濟損失。日本某電子公司接到子公司轉來的訴狀后,便委托我所代理應訴。接受委托后,我們立即組織力量進行文獻檢索,并及時向國家知識產權局專利復審委員會提出宣告涉案發明專利權無效的請求,同時向法院申請中止本案的審理,等無效宣告案件終結后再開庭審理此侵權訴訟案件。此外,承辦律師與專利代理人及時對被訴產品與原告專利保護范圍進行認真分析與比對,認為被訴產品的技術特征未落入原告專利權的保護范圍。為慎重起見,經日本公司的同意,我們又將被訴產品委托有資質的司法鑒定機構進行技術鑒定,所得出的鑒定結論與我方的分析結查完全相同。在此情形下,被告將上述司法鑒定報告提交給法院,并請求法院依法駁回原告的訴訟請求。

       Shanghai Company vs. Japanese electronics company for patent infringement.
       Shanghai Company has Chinese patent right on” mobile phone camera drive units” and challenge the patent infringement by the mirror drive components from the subsidiary company of the Japanese electronics company. The Shanghai Company filed a lawsuit against the Japanese electronics company and requested to stop infringement and compensated damages. The Defendant Japanese electronics company entrusted our lawyer to answer the case when it received Complaint. Our lawyers team quickly arrange the prior art search for involved patent and filed invalidation request in SIPO to challenge the patent. Meanwhile our lawyer also presented request to the Court to suspend the litigation case, based on the ongoing invalidation procedure. Furthermore our team of lawyer and patent attorney made internal analysis on the evidence from Plaintiff and its patent to find out the technical features did not fallen into the protection scope of invention patent. In order to strengthen the rebuttal, third party’s expert analysis was arranged to confirm our allegation. Thereafter all the documents and evidences are presented to the Court and request the Court to reject the litigation requests of the plaintiff.

臺灣某科技公司訴深圳某公司實用新型專利侵權案件

上一篇

下一篇

上海某公司訴日本某電子公司發明專利侵權案件

添加時間:

本網站由阿里云提供云計算及安全服務 Powered by CloudDream
极速时时彩计划数据 湖北11选五走势图一表 黄大仙六肖期期1准免 今日股市行情走势 新快三 江西11选5历史开奖查询 体彩十一运夺金开奖结果 黑龙江22选五走势图带连线 理财收益 股票入门与技巧 财富牛