We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 788

等同原则的可预见性限制
  • CCPIT Patent & Trademark Law Office
  • China
  • August 27 2014

在专利侵权判定中有两个与可预见性相关的问题第一个问题涉及申请专利时可预见的等同技术是否适用等同原则的问题也即本文将要讨论的等同原则的可预见性限制


联系禁止反悔和等同侵权原则的适用案例的思考
  • CCPIT Patent & Trademark Law Office
  • China
  • August 27 2014

在中誉电子上海有限公司与上海九鹰电子科技有限公司的实用新型专利侵权纠纷案件中涉案专利的权利要求1-2被宣告无效在权利要求3的基础上维持专利有效


The key to success in patent litigation
  • Panawell & Partners LLC
  • China
  • December 3 2014

China has witnessed a remarkable increase in patent litigation over the last few years. In 2013, 9,195 patent-related civil cases were brought to


地裁が好ましい実施態様に合わせてクレームを不適切に限定したと判断された事例
  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • China, USA
  • December 22 2014

Federal CircuitはGE LIGHTING SOLUTIONS, LLC v. AGILIGHT, Inc. (Appeal No. 13-1267) においてクレーム解釈に基づき非侵害とする略式判決の一部を覆し一部を支持した


楼氏电子与歌尔声学专利侵权诉讼评析
  • CCPIT Patent & Trademark Law Office
  • China
  • October 31 2014

2014 年 4 月潍坊市中级人民法院针对歌尔声学股份有限公司以下简称“歌尔声学”诉楼氏电子苏州有限公司以下简称“楼氏电子苏州”专利 侵权系列案做出了部分判决


Recent proposed amendments to China’s Patent Law: will it help to improve the enforceability of patents in China?
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • China
  • October 29 2014

By 2015, the Chinese government plans to double the number of patent applications filed with the State Intellectual Property Office (“SIPO”), such


The story of battling giants: comments on Goertek Acoustics v. Knowles Electronics
  • CCPIT Patent & Trademark Law Office
  • China
  • October 31 2014

In April 2014, the Weifang City Intermediate People's Court made decisions in two of five patent infringement lawsuits between GoerTek Acoustics and


Shimano Inc. v. Patent Reexamination Board, return of the new matter issue to its regular understanding?
  • CCPIT Patent & Trademark Law Office
  • China
  • January 19 2015

On December 27, 2013, the Supreme People’s Court of China made its Judgment on Shimano Inc. v. Patent Reexamination Board (i.e. PRB). Supreme


How to interpret inconsistent claims with detail specifications Xi’an Qinbang Telecommunication Material Co.,Ltd. v. Wuxi Longsheng Cable Material Factory et.al.(Article No. 4 from “China patent case review 2014” by Beijing East IP Ltd.)
  • Beijing East IP Ltd
  • China
  • November 5 2014

Obvious drafting mistakes in the claims of a granted patent do not inevitably render the patent invalid. If those skilled in the art upon reading the


通过假想案例讨论侵权的问题
  • Kangxin Partners PC
  • China
  • December 2 2014

下文中所提到的涉案专利以及被控侵权产品均是假想的其并不是真实的案例