文章来源: 作者：北京欢乐城娱乐 时间：2016/4/26 阅读次数：520
The Interpretation (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases, as adopted at the 1676th Meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on January 25, 2016, is hereby issued and shall come into force on April 1, 2016.
Supreme People's Court 最高人民法院
March 21, 2016 2016年3月21日
Interpretation (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases
(Adopted at the 1676th Meeting of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on January 25, 2016, which shall come into force on April 1, 2016, Interpretation No. 1  of the Supreme People's Court)
In order to correctly try patent infringement dispute cases, this Interpretation is developed in accordance with the provisions of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, the Tort Law of the People's Republic of China, the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and other relevant laws, and in light of the judicial practice.
Article 1 Where there are two or more claims in a statement of claims, the patentee shall specify in the written complaint the claims based on which it initiates an action against the alleged infringer for infringement upon its patent right. Where there is no such record or the record is unclear in the written complaint, the people's court shall require the patentee to specify the relevant information. Where, after explanations, the patentee still fails to specify the relevant information, the people's court may rule to dismiss the action.
Article 2 Where the claims of a patentee in a patent infringement action is declared invalid by the Patent Reexamination Board, the people's court that tries the patent infringement dispute case may rule to dismiss the action which is initiated based on such invalid claims.
Where there is evidence proving that the decision of declaring the invalidation of the aforesaid claims is set aside by an effective administrative judgment, the patentee may initiate a separate action.
Where the patentee initiates a separate action, the limitation of action for patent infringement shall be calculated from the date when the written administrative judgment as mentioned in paragraph 2 of this Article is served.
Article 3 Where any patent right is requested to be declared invalid because the specifications cannot be used to interpret the claims due to the evident violation of paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 26 of the Patent Law, and the case does not fall within the scope of the circumstances as prescribed in Article 4 of this Interpretation, the people's court that tries the patent infringement dispute case shall generally rule to suspend the action; or where the patent right is not requested to be declared invalid during a reasonable period, the people's court may, according to the records in the claims, determine the scope of protection of the patent right.
Article 4 Where any grammars, words, punctuations, graphics or symbols, among others, in the statement of claims, specifications or the attached diagramsare ambiguous, but the ordinary skill in the art can get the unique understanding by reading the statement of claims, specifications or the attached diagrams, the people's court shall make determination according to the unique understanding.
Article 5 When a people's court determines the scope of protection of a patent right, the technical features recorded in the preamble andcharacterization of an independent claim, and thereference or definition of a subordinate claim shallall have the definitive roles.
Article 6 A people's court may interpret the claims of the patent involved in a case by using any other patent which has the divisional application relationship with the patent involved in the case and its patent examination archives or effective patent granting and confirmation judgment documents.
Patent examination archives include the written materials submitted by the patent applicant or patentee in the process of patent examination, reexamination and invalidation, the notice of examination opinions made by the patent administrative department of the State Council and its Patent Reexamination Board, meeting records, oral hearing records, effective written decision on the examination of patent reexamination request, and the written decision on the examination of request for declaring invalidation ofa patent right, among others.
Article 7 Where any alleged infringing technical solution is supplemented with other technical features on the basis of including all technical features of the claims for any enclosed composition, the people's court shall determine the alleged infringing technical solution does not fall within the scope of protection of the patent right, except when the added technical features do not fall within the scope of the conventional quantity ofinevitableimpurities.
The claims for the enclosed composition as mentioned in the preceding paragraph generally exclude the claims for traditional Chinese medicine composition.
Article 8 Functional features means the technical features which define the structures, components, procedures, conditions or the mutual relationship thereof, among others, through their functions or effects in invention and creation, except when the ordinary skill in the art can directly and explicitly determine the specific exploitation mode for achieving the aforesaid functions or effects only by reading the claims.
Where, in comparison with the indispensable technical features for achieving the functions or effects as mentioned in the preceding paragraph as recorded in the specifications and the attached diagrams, the corresponding technical features of the alleged infringing technical solution realizes basically the same functions and achieve basically the same results by basically the same means as the stated technical features, with which an ordinary skill in the art is able to associate without any creative activity when the alleged infringing act occurs, the people's court shall determine the corresponding technical features are identical with or equivalent to the functional features.
Article 9 Where the alleged infringing technical solution cannot apply to the usage environment defined by the usage environment features in the claims, the people' s court shall determine the alleged infringing technical solution does not fall within the scope of protection of the patent right.
Article 10 Where the technical features of any product is defined through preparation method in the claims, and the preparation method for the alleged infringing product is neither identical with nor equivalent to that of the said product, the people's court shall determine the alleged infringing technical solution does not fall within the scope of protection of the patent right.
Article 11 Where the order of the technical steps is not explicitly recorded in the claims for the methods, but the ordinary skill in the art directly and explicitly deem after reading the statement of claims, specifications and the attached diagrams that the technical steps shall be exploited in a specific order, the people's court shall deem the order of such steps has a definitive role in determining the scope of protection of the patent right.
Article 12 Where a claim defines the numeric features with “at a minimum” or “not more than” or any other terms, and the ordinary skills in the art deem after reading the statement of claims, specifications and the attached diagrams that such technical solution specially emphasizes that the definitive role of the term in the technical feature, the patentee's claim that a different numeric feature is an equivalent feature shall not be supported by the people's court.