(Adopted on 19 June 2001 at the 1180th meeting of the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme People's Court, Fashi (2001) No. 21, promulgated on 22 June 2001 and enforced on 1 July 2001)

According to the rules of the “General Rule of Civil Law of the People' Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the General Rule of Civil Law), the “Patent Law of the People' Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Law), the “Civil Procedure Law of the People' Republic of China” and the “Administrative Procedure Law of the People' Republic of China,” the rules are hereby made as follows for the purpose of correct trial of patent dispute cases:

Article 1　
The people's court accepts the following dispute cases:

1. Cases involving disputes over a patent application right

2. Cases involving disputes over to which party a patent right should belong

3. Cases involving disputes arising from contracts on the transfer of patent right or the right to apply for a patent

4. Cases involving disputes arising from patent right infringement

5. Cases involving disputes arising from passing off the patent of another person

6. Cases involving disputes over the patent royalty after an application for patent is declared but before the patent right is granted

7. Cases involving disputes over an inventor of inventions of new professions, reward for a designer or remuneration

8. Cases of stopping the right infringement or of custody of property prior to the filing of a lawsuit

9. Cases involving disputes over the qualification of an inventor or a designer

10. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the Patent Review Committee on its decision to maintain or refuse an application for the review of a patent

11. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the Patent Review Committee on its decision to invalidate a patent

12. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the Patent 
Administration under the State Council on its decision to execute a compulsory license

13. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the Patent Administration under the State Council on its ruling regarding the execution of compulsory patent royalty

14. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the Patent Administration under the State Council on its decision of administrative review

15. Cases involving dissatisfaction with the administrative executive in charge of patent administration on its administrative decision

16. Cases involving other patent disputes

Article 2　
The trial of first instance of cases involving patent disputes shall come under the jurisdiction of the intermediate people's court in the place where the people's government of a province, an autonomous region or a municipality directly under the Central Government is located or the people's court designated by the Supreme People's Court.

Article 3　
If a party concerned is dissatisfied with the Patent Review Committee’s review decision made after July 1, 2001 on the application for revoking a patent right of utility model or design and files a lawsuit to the people's court, the people's court shall not accept the case.

Article 4　
If a party concerned is dissatisfied with the Patent Review Committee’s review decision made after July 1, 2001 to maintain the rejection of the application for a patent right of utility model or design and files a lawsuit to the people's court, the people’s court shall accept the case.

Article 5　
A lawsuit filed because of patent right infringement shall come under the jurisdiction of the people's court in the action place of the patent right infringement or the place of the defendant’s residence.

The action place of the patent right infringement includes places as follows: places where acts such as manufacture, use, promise of sales, sales and import of products accused of infringing an invention or utility model patent right are committed; places where an act of using a patented method is committed or where acts such as use, promise of sales, sales and import of products manufactured by directly employing the said patented method are committed; places where acts of manufacture, sales and import of products with a design patent right are committed; places where an act of passing off the patent of another person is committed; and places of the final results of the right infringement arising from the above mentioned acts of the patent right infringement.

Article 6　
If the plaintiff files a lawsuit only against the manufacturer of a patent right infringing product but not against the seller of the said product and the place where the said product is manufactured is not identical with the place where the said product is sold, then the case shall come under the jurisdiction of the people's court in the place where the said product is manufactured.

If the seller of a patent right infringing product is a branch of the manufacturer and the plaintiff files a lawsuit against the manufacturer's act of manufacture and the seller's act of selling, then the case shall come under the jurisdiction of the people's court in the place where the said product is sold.

Article 7
Regarding a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff against an act of patent right infringement based on an application for the patent right filed before January 1, 1993 and on the patent right of a method invention granted according to the said application, a decision shall be made on its jurisdiction by referring to the above articles 5 and 6.

The people's court shall, in its substantive trial, follow the law and apply the rule that the patent right of method invention does not extend to cover products.

Article 8　
When filing a lawsuit against the infringement of a utility model patent, the plaintiff shall submit a research report made by the Patent Administration under the State Council.

If the defendant in a case of utility model or design patent right infringement makes a request to suspend the trial, he shall make a request to invalidate the patent held by the plaintiff during the debate period.

Article 9　
Regarding the case of the utility model or design patent right infringement accepted by the people's court, if the defendant makes a request during the debate period to invalidate the said patent, then the people's court shall suspend the trial, but the people's court may not suspend the trial if any of the following conditions is met:

(1) the research report submitted by the plaintiff lacks technical documents showing that the patent of the plaintiff has lost its novelty and creativity;

(2) evidence provided by the defendant shows that the technology used by the defendant has been widely known;

(3) evidence provided by the defendant or the ground based on which to request the invalidation of the said patent is apparently insufficient; or

(4) other conditions for which the people's court believes that it is not suitable to suspend the trial.

Article 10　
Regarding a case of utility model or design patent right infringement accepted by the people's court, if the defendant makes a request after the expiration of the debate period to invalidate the said patent, then the people's court shall not suspend the trial, unless the court deems it necessary to suspend the trial after the examination.

Article 11　
Regarding a case of utility model or design patent right infringement accepted by the people's court or a case of utility model or design patent right infringement for which the Patent Review Committee has decided to maintain the patent right, if the defendant makes a request during the debate period to invalidate the said patent, the people's court may not suspend the trial.

Article 12　
If the people's court decides to suspend the trial, or if the patentee or other interested parties request the court to order the defendant to stop a relevant act or take other measures to prevent the damage of infringement from expanding and have provided a security, the people's court may, after examining the case and finding that the said request conforms to the relevant legal regulations, make other relevant rulings at the same time of deciding to suspend the trial.

Article 13　
When executing custody of property for a patent right, the people's court shall send the Patent Administration under the State Council a notification of cooperation for execution which clearly shows the items calling for cooperation and the duration of custody of property for the patent right and is attached by a document of ruling made by the people's court.

The duration of custody of property for a patent right shall not exceed six months for one time and is calculated from the date on which the Patent Administration under the State Council receives the notification of cooperation for execution. If it is necessary to continue custody of property for the said patent right, the people's court shall, before the duration of custody of property expires, send the Patent Administration under the State Council another notification of cooperation for execution to continue custody of property. If the said notification fails to be sent before the duration expires, then the custody of property for the said patent right is deemed to be lifted automatically.

The people's court may take the measure of custody of property for a patent right in pledge and the pledgee's right to receive compensations shall not be influenced by the measure of custody of property. The exclusive execution contract concluded between the patentee and the licensee shall have no influence on the measure of custody of property for the said patent right taken in pledge by the people's court.

The people's court shall not repeatedly execute custody of property for a patent right for which the measure of custody of property has already been taken.

Article 14　
Regarding inventions and creations accomplished by using a workplace's materials and technologies before July 1, 2001, if the workplace and the inventor or the designer concluded a contract in which they had come to agreement regarding the right to file an application for patent and the belonging of the patent right, then such agreement shall be observed.

Article 15　
If a case of patent right infringement accepted by the people's court causes a conflict of rights, the legal benefits of the party concerned that enjoys priority in having a right according to the law shall be protected.

Article 16　
The legal rights owned by others prior to the design referred to in Article 23 of the Patent Law shall include rights pertaining to trademark, copyright and company name, right of portrait, right to use the peculiar package or decoration of a well-known commodity, etc.

Article 17　
“The scope of protection in the patent right for an invention or a utility model shall be determined by the contents of the patent claim. The specification and appended drawings may be used to interpret the patent claim” referred to in the first paragraph of Article 56 of the Patent Law means that the protection of a patent right shall be based on the scope determined by the necessary technological attributes clearly written in the patent claim document, and this shall also mean the scope determined by the attributes equivalent to the said technological attributes.

An equivalent attribute means an attribute which is basically equivalent to the written technological attribute, performs basically the same function, attains basically the same result and can be associated without an ordinary technician’s creative work.

Article 18　
Regarding an act of patent right infringement that happened before July 1, 2001, the provisions of the Patent Law prior to the revision shall be applied to investigate its civil liability; regarding an act of patent right infringement that happened on or after July 1, 2001, the provisions of the revised Patent Law shall be applied to investigate its civil liability.

Article 19　
Regarding an act of passing off a patent of another person, the people’s court may investigate the civil liability according to the provision of Article 58 of the Patent Law. If the administrative authorities for patent affairs did not impose any punishment, the people’s court may impose civil punitive measures according to the provision of Paragraph 3 of Article 134 of the General Rule of Civil Law, and the amount of the applicable civil fine may be determined according to the provision of Article 58 of the Patent Law.

Article 20　
When a person who has infringed a patent right is investigated for his liability for damages according to Paragraph 1 of Article 57 of the Patent Law, the people’s court may, based on the patentee’s request, determine the amount of damages according to the losses suffered by the patentee or according to the profits obtained by the infringer as a result of the patent right infringement.

The losses suffered by the patentee as a result of the patent right infringement may be calculated by multiplying the total decrease in the patent’s sales volume arising from the patent right infringement by the reasonable profit of each piece of the patent product. If it is difficult to determine the total decrease in the patentee’s sales volume, the result obtained by multiplying the total number of pieces of the patent-infringing product sold in the market by the reasonable profit of each piece of the patent product may be regarded as the losses suffered by the patentee as a result of the patent right infringement.

The profits gained by the infringer as a result of the patent right infringement may be calculated by multiplying the total number of pieces of the patent-infringing product sold in the market by the reasonable profit of each piece of the patent-infringing product. The profits gained by the infringer as a result of the patent right infringement is in general calculated according to the infringer’s operating profits, and for those infringers who entirely make the patent right infringement as their occupations, the said profits may be calculated according to the sales profits.

Article 21
If it is difficult to determine the losses suffered by the patentee or the profits gained by the infringer but there is the patent royalty which can be used as a yardstick, the people’s court may determine the amount of damages by appropriately taking one to three times the said patent royalty as a basis according to factors such as the type of patent, the nature and circumstances of the patent right infringement, the amount of the patent royalty, and the nature, scope and time of the said patent royalty. If there is no patent royalty which can be used as a yardstick or the patent royalty is apparently unreasonable, the people’s court may determine the amount of damages to be a minimum of 5,000 Yuan and a maximum of 300,000 Yuan in general according to factors such as the type of patent, the nature and circumstances of the patent right infringement, the amount of the patent royalty, and the nature, scope and time of the said patent royalty. The amount of damages shall not exceed 500,000 Yuan.

Article 22　
The people’s court may, according to the patentee’s request or the details of the case, include in the amount of damages the reasonable expenses paid by the patentee for investigating and stopping the patent right infringement.

Article 23　
The prescription of the patent right infringement is two years and shall be calculated from the date on which the patentee or an interested party knew or should have known about the act of the patent right infringement. If the patentee files a lawsuit after two years and the act of the patent right infringement is continuing at the time the lawsuit is filed, the people’s court shall, during the effective period of the patent, make a ruling to stop the patent right infringement, and the amount of damages for the patent right infringement shall be calculated two years backward from the date on which the patentee filed the lawsuit to the people’s court.

Article 24　
The promise of sales referred to in Articles 11 and 63 of the Patent Law means the declaration of intention regarding the sales of a product by means of advertisement, display in a shop window or display at an exhibition.

Article 25
Regarding cases of patent right infringement accepted and tried by the people’s court, if the administrative authorities for patent affairs have ruled that the patent right has been or not been infringed on, the people’s court shall still proceed with the full-scale investigation of the request for trial put forward the party concerned.

Article 26　
Should any discrepancy be found between this version and the previous related judicial interpretations, this version shall prevail.