Recently, our firm won the first instance of an administrative litigation case for invalidation of an invention patent, in which it is ruled that the invention patent should be comp...
Introduction In the chemical field, it is difficult to seek invalidation of a patent claiming to have achieved unexpected technical effect. This case provides a strategy for success...
China Pronounced the Judgement on the First Pharmaceutical Patent Linkage Lawsuit
On April 15th, Beijing Intellectual Property Court publicly pronounced the judgment for a first instance case, where the plaintiff Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. sued the defendant Wenzhou HAIHE Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. arguing over whether the defendant’s drug fells into the protection scope of patent. The court held that the generic drug involved did not fall within the protection scope of the patent involved, and ruled to reject the plaintiff's claim. The plaintiff stated in court that they would appeal.
This case marks the first drug patent linkage lawsuit in China since the implementation of the newly amended Patent Law. (April 16th, IPRdaily)
Illumina Told to pay $333.8 Million (CNY 2.2 Billion) in Damages! MGI Wins Patent Litigation in the US
On May 6th, local time in the United States, the judgement on the patent lawsuit between MGI and Illumina in the United States was pronounced.
The federal jury of Delaware found that Illumina's two-channel sequencing system infringed two DNA sequencing patents held by Complete Genomics, a subsidiary of MGI, and ruled Illumina to pay MGI $333.8 million in damages (about CNY 2.2 billion). The spokesman of Illumina has stated they would appeal. (May 8th, IPRdaily)
Trademark infringement and unfair competition
Guangdong Higher People's Court Affirms the Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Act of the Fake “DUNLOPPILLO” and Awards CNY 6 Million in Damages
On April 24th, Guangdong Higher People's Court made the final judgment on the trademark infringement and unfair competition lawsuit brought by Dunlopillo (Shenzhen) Ltd., against Company Talalay, Zhang, etc. The court upheld the original judgement and rejected the appeal filed by the defendants. The five defendants including Talalay were ordered to jointly pay the compensation of CNY 6 million, and more than 630,000 people watched the online trial that day.
“邓禄普” “DUNLOPPILLO” is a famous British brand, who registered its trademarks in China as early as May 1987 and used on the goods of mattresses and pillows. In 2014, Zhang XX established Talalay Company after he was found to have infringed the exclusive trademark right of DUNLOPPILLO and cooperated with the other four defendants using “邓禄普” as the company name. They registered multiple websites that contain “邓禄普” “DUNLOP” and WeChat official accounts to advertise, produced counterfeit mattresses and other products of DUNLOPPILLO, and set up “邓禄普” physical stores to sell for profit. In addition, they used their personal account so as to avoid the infringement liability and to facilitate their full-scale infringement acts of counterfeiting DUNLOPPILLO.
Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court determined in the first instance that Company Talalay constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition, and ordered Talalay Company, Zhang XX, and other defendants to jointly pay a compensation of CNY 6 million, stop the infringement and eliminate the ill influences. The five defendants were unsatisfied with the judgment and appealed.
Guangdong Higher People's Court, the court of second instance, rendered the final ruling by upholding the original judgement. The court found that the Dunlopillo (Shenzhen) Ltd’s trademarks enjoyed high popularity after being used on mattresses for a long time. Considering that the disputed trademarks in this case were identical with or similar to Dunloppillo’s trademarks, it is easy to cause confusion and constitutes an infringement to Dunloppillo’s exclusive rights to use its registered trademarks. Zhang and other accused infringers had a close connection, and played different roles and worked together in the infringement act with obvious subjective malicious and serious circumstances. Therefore, the compensation should be paid in full. (April 24th, China news)
IP-related policy
Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts in 2021
On April 21, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference for the 2022 Intellectual Property Publicity Week to report the overall condition of judicial protection of intellectual property in courts across the country in 2021 and released the Intellectual Property Protection by Chinese Courts in 2021 in both Chinese and English, which systematically introduced the judicial protection condition of IP by the Chinese courts in 2021. (April 21th, the Supreme People's Court)
2021 Exemplary Cases of Trademark Opposition and Review Released
On April 26th World Intellectual Property Day, the CNIPA successively released the White Paper on China's Intellectual Property Protection in 2021, 2021 Exemplary Cases of Trademark Opposition and Review, 2021 Top Ten Cases of Patent Invalidation Reexamination, and 2021 Exemplary Cases of Administrative Protection of Intellectual Property. (April 26th, the CNIPA)
