1, Request for reexamination for a patent of Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design and Research, Changjiang Water Resources Committee was accredited
A patent for invention application No. 200910060608.2, filed on January 20, 2009, entitled “EMBEDDED JOINT METER AND METHOD FOR DETECTING FRACTURE OPENING DEGREE” and applied for by the Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design and Research, Changjiang Water Resources Committee, after going through a first Notification of an Office Action and a first reply, was rejected by Decision of Rejection issued by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) on January 14, 2011 because of Claim 1 of the patent application being not in accordance with Paragraph 4 of Article 26 of The Patent Law, specifically, see third item of the Office Action of first examination, including two points: first, not any displacement sensor arranged in a sensor jacket in any mode can be used for implementing the invention, for example, a fiber optic displacement sensor glued in the sensor jacket cannot be used for implementing the invention, moreover, not any sensor jacket of any structure and type can be used for implementing the invention, for example, a jacket of a single-tube structure cannot be used for the invention; second, an embodiment of the specification discloses only one embodiment of a string sensor, and those skilled in the art hardly expect that displacement sensors of other types/structures can be used for implementing the invention, therefore, a technical solution of Claim 1 cannot be obtained or concluded from disclosed contents of the specification.
The Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design and Research, Changjiang Water Resources Committee refused to accept the Decision of Rejection, entrusted the Hubei Wuhan Yongjia Patent Agency Co., Ltd. and made a request for reexamination to Patent Reexamination Board of CNIPA, and Hu Jianping, the general manager and the patent attorney of the Hubei Wuhan Yongjia Patent Agency undertook agency for the request for reexamination and explains, in the request for reexamination in detail, reasons that the application is in accordance with the regulations in the Patent Law.
A few days ago, the Patent Reexamination Board issued Decision No. 35874, contents of which are that the Decision of Rejection issued by the CNIPA on January 14, 2011 is withdrawn according to opinions of the preceding Office Action, and procedures for examination and approval are continued by the original examination department.
2, Request for invalidation made by Wuhan Eleca Electronics Co., Ltd. was accredited, which is handled by Hubei Yongjia
The Wuhan Eleca Electronics Co., Ltd., the petitioner of request for invalidation, proposed the request for invalidation to Hans Peter Wilfee, a patentee of a patent for design with a patent number ZL20013032739, entitled “SUPPORT OF MUSICAL INSTRUMENT (ESPECIALLY GUITAR)”. Yongjia accepted the entrustment of the petitioner, and Hu Jianping, the patent attorney, carried out the replay and took part in Oral Proceedings of the Patent Reexamination Board of CNIPA.
Finally, the Patent Reexamination Board of CNIPA made the Decision No. 6341 on Examination for Request for Invalidation and declared that all patent rights for the patent concerned remain invalid. Key points of the Decision are that evidences of a seal of an undertaker of a related exhibition and related individual signatures provided by the petitioner prove that these pictures are shot on spot in the exhibition and that the patent is similar to a design of a guitar support publicly used in the domestic exhibition before the application data of the patent, so the patent is not in accordance with regulations of Article 23 of the Patent Law.
3, Rights protection of Wuhan Taipu Transformer Changer Co., Ltd. succeeded, which is handled by Hubei Yongjia
The Wuhan Taipu Transformer Changer Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Taipu Company), the indicter, claimed that an patent for utility model, entitled “NO-EXCITATION POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CONTROL TAP-CHANGER” was applied for by the Taipu company to the CNIPA on July 28, 2000, and the application was granted as the patent right for utility model with a patent number ZL00230482.1 by the CNIPA on June 6, 2001. After obtaining the patent grant, the Taipu company carried out production and selling. Afterwards, the Taipu company discovered that an Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province, the indictee, had massively produced and sold tube-type no-excitation tap-changers of WSGVⅦ250 and 35-3*3Y since the beginning of 2003. After comparison, the above products of the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province completely fell within the protection scope of the patent right of the Taipu company, so the Taipu company considered that the behavior of the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province which produced and sold the series of products of the type without permission of the patentee infringed the patent right of the Taipu company. The indictee, the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province, selling the above products infringed the patent right of the Taipu company. Through mediation of the Intermediate People’s Court of Wuhan city of Hubei Province, the both parties came to the following mediation agreement, key points of which are as follows: producing and selling of tube-type no-excitation tap-changers of WSGVⅦ250 and 35-3*3Y and the series of products by the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province fell within the protection scope of the patent and formed patent infringement, so the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province should pay for compensation fee of 50,000 RMB for the Taipu company; and the Taipu company agreed to allow the Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. of Zhejiang province to exclusively use the patent, made an agreement for specific patent agency licensing fee, a payment mode and related items. The valid period of the agreement lasts till termination of the patent right.
4, Patent right owned by KINGDREAM Public Limited Company remains valid, which is handled by Hubei YongJia
The KINGDREAM Public Limited Company applies for a patent for utility model, entitled “SINGLE CONE BIT” to the CNIPA on September 10, 1998, and the application is granted by announcement on April 26, 2000 with the patent number ZL98219946.5.
One machinery factory made a request for invalidation of the right for the patent to the Patent Reexamination Board on March 12, 2003 for the reason that Claims 1-7, 11 and 12 of the patent for utility model with the patent number ZL98219946.5, entitled “SINGLE CONE BIT” are not in accordance with the regulations of Paragraph 2 and Paragraph 3 of Article 22 of the Patent Law. Hu Jianping, the general manager and patent attorney of the company, accepted the entrustment of the patentee, performed invalidation defence and took part in Oral Proceedings of the Patent Reexamination Board of the CNIPA, finally, the Patent Reexamination Board, through examination, made a Decision No. 5537 on Examination for request for invalidation (Invalidation decision No.5537) on October 22, 2003 and the patent right for unity model “SINGLE CONE BIT” remained valid.
The machinery factory, the petitioner of the request for invalidation, refused to accept the decision made by the Patent Reexamination Board and indicted the administrative litigation to the First Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing Municipality. The First Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing Municipality took the view that errors in the Invalidation Decision No. 5537 provided by the machinery factory did not damage the right of the factory, so it was not unclear fact confirmation, improper application of law or illegal procedures. According to the evidences provided by the machinery factory, the Patent Reexamination Board considered that the single cone bit and a PDC bit are of different types, the inadequate reason revealed by the technique of Claim 1 of the patent for utility model “SINGLE CONE BIT” was not given in the evidences provided by the KINGDREAM Public Limited Company, and the Patent Reexamination Board confirmed, based on the reason, that Claim 1 of the patent did not meet having no basis of innovation. According to the regulation in Item 2 of Paragraph 1 of Article 54 in Administrative Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the First Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing Municipality made a judgement: first, the Invalidation Decision No. 5537 made by the Patent Reexamination Board is withdrawn; and second, the Patent Reexamination Board should make a decision on examination again for the request for invalidation, made by the machinery factory, of the patent for utility model “SINGLE CONE BIT” enjoyed by the KINGDREAM Public Limited Company.
Afterwards, the Patent Reexamination Board and the KINGDREAM Public Limited Company refused to accept the administrative judgement No. 854 Intermediate/Administrative judgement/Primary made by the First Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing Municipality (2003) and instituted an appeal to the court. Hu Jianping, the general manager and the patent attorney of the company, and Jiang Hongyi, a lawyer of Beijing Lifang & Partners, represent the KINGDREAM Public Limited Company to take part in the litigation. The High People’s Court of Beijing Municipality, through handling, considered that grounds of appeal of the Patent Reexamination Board and the KINGDREAM Public Limited Company were founded, supported the appeal and, according to the regulation in Item 3 of Paragraph 1 of Article 61 in the Administrative Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, made the following judgement ((2004) High/Administrative judgement/Final No. 398):
first, the administrative judgement No. 854 Intermediate/Administrative judgement/Preliminary made by the First Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing Municipality (2003) is withdrawn; and
second, the Decision No. 5537 on Examination for request for invalidation made by the Patent Reexamination Board of CNIPA remains.
The judgment is the final.
