国产 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕-国产午夜成人精品视频app-国产区精品系列在线观看-在线视+欧美+亚洲日本-丰满熟妇乱又伦在线无码视频

Unitalen Defended Client against “Magnetic levitation” Patent Infringement Suit

December 16, 2016

Posted on December 15, 2016

 

“Maglev (Magnetic levitation)” is a technology that uses magnetic force against gravity to levitate objects. As known, there are 3 kinds of “maglev” technologies: one is the “routine conductive maglev” led by Germany, the second is “superconductive maglev” led by Japan, both of which require electricity power to generate maglev force; and the third is China’s “permanent maglev” which, by using a special permanent magnetic material, doesn’t require any other power support.

 

The plaintiff, Guangdong Zhaoqing HCNT Technology Ltd. is the owner of No. 200610065336.1 invention patent concerning “Magnetic-repellent suspension device”, and had won more than 10 patent infringement suits across the country.

 

On July 27, 2015, the plaintiff filed a suit before Hangzhou Intermediate Court alleging against Shenzhen Hong Xin Tuo Pu Electronic Technology Ltd. (the defendant) for selling in large quantity infringing products on Alibaba and T-Mall online stores, along with the claim for an indemnity of 500,000 yuan and other reasonable legal fees.

 

Entrusted by the defendant, Unitalen attended court hearing with four defenses: 1) prior art defense; 2) doctrine of estoppels, as the plaintiff had voluntarily narrowed down the protection scope of its patent, namely “the levitation object is permanent magnetic levitation object instead of electric magnetic levitation object”; 3) the protection scope of the claims shall be interpreted as being limited to “one ring-shaped permanent magnet” rather than “one and more ring-shaped permanent magnet(s)” despite the open-ended claim with the word “including”; and 4) the technical feature described in claim 1 is a “functional limitation”, under which circumstances the Court shall determine the content of the technical feature by making reference to the specific implementing methods or equivalent methods described in the specifications and drawings, according to Judicial Interpretations concerning patent disputes. But due to the plaintiff’s failure to take on its own “burden of proof” by resorting to judicial expertise, there is no target comparable to the technical solution of the alleged infringing product.   

 

On August 24, 2016, Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court issued the first instance judgment dismissing all of the plaintiff’s claims. According to the court, the plaintiff shall bear the burden to prove the establishment of infringement, the precondition for which is that the alleged infringing product possesses the technical features identical with or equivalents to all of the technical features under the plaintiff’s claims. As the plaintiff withdrew its applications for judicial expertise and professional assistant due to the concern of the high cost, the technical features under the functional limitation cannot be compared one by one, thus it cannot be determined whether the alleged infringing product falls within the protection scope of the patent at issue. Therefore, the patent infringement claims submitted by the plaintiff shall not be sustained. 

 

 

Keywords

主站蜘蛛池模板: 精品无码av无码免费专区| 在线观看欧美一区二区三区 | 少妇的肉体k8经典| 老司机午夜福利试看体验区| 国产日韩av在线播放| 99久久人妻无码精品系列蜜桃| а√8天堂中文官网资源| 日本精品巨爆乳无码大乳巨| 久久久亚洲欧洲日产av| 欧美高清精品一区二区| 华人少妇被黑人粗大的猛烈进| 特黄 做受又硬又粗又大视频 | 97超碰人人爱香蕉精品| 丰满少妇69激情啪啪无| 欧美嫩交一区二区三区| 欧美成人一区二区三区片免费| 2020久久天天躁狠狠躁夜夜| 国产精品美女久久久久av爽| 天天日夜夜爽| 亚洲熟妇少妇任你躁在线观看| 99久久无色码中文字幕| 无码中文av有码中文av| 国产精品久久久久久久久鸭无码| 高清偷自拍第1页| 国产性色αv视频免费| 国产精品无码专区在线观看| 精品国产污污免费网站| 国产亚洲午夜高清国产拍精品| 精品国内在视频线2019| 高清无码在线视频| av一本久道久久综合久久鬼色| 亚洲精品无码av中文字幕| 中文字幕亚洲色妞精品天堂| 7m精品福利视频导航| 无码人妻丰满熟妇精品区| 人妻丰满熟妇无码区免费| 中国极品少妇xxxxx| 人妻av无码专区久久| 久久婷婷五月综合97色直播| 中文字幕理伦午夜福利片| 亚洲乱码尤物193yw|