>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Chen Shundi v. Zhejiang Lesheros Household Articles Co., Ltd., He Jianhua and Wen Shidan (invention patent infringement dispute)
陈顺弟与浙江乐雪儿家居用品有限公司、何建华、温士丹侵害发明专利权纠纷提审案
【法宝引证码】
*尊敬的用户,您好!本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务,如需整篇翻译,请发邮件至database@chinalawinfo.com,或致电86 (10) 8268-9699进行咨询。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at:  + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com

Chen Shundi v. Zhejiang Lesheros Household Articles Co., Ltd., He Jianhua and Wen Shidan (invention patent infringement dispute)
(invention patent infringement dispute)
陈顺弟与浙江乐雪儿家居用品有限公司、何建华、温士丹侵害发明专利权纠纷提审案
[Key Terms]
patent ; infringement ; doctrine of equivalents
[核心术语]
专利;侵权;等同原则
[Disputed Issues]
If the change in the order of steps for a method patent results in the technical effects with substantial differences, does such act constitute the equivalent infringement?
[争议焦点]
改变方法专利的步骤顺序,但产生了实质性差异的技术效果,是否构成等同侵权?
[Case Summary]
The equivalent infringement comes from the doctrine of equivalents in the Patent Law. The doctrine of equivalents means: although the allegedly infringing product doesn't possess all technical features as required by patent rights the equivalents of the absent patent features can be found on the allegedly infringing product under this circumstance the allegedly infringing product shall be determined as infringing. The basic methods to be equivalent include the simple shift of product components the simple change in the order of steps for a method patent...
[案例要旨]
等同侵权来源于专利法中的等同原则。等同原则是指尽管被控侵权物不具备专利权要求的全部特征但是其不具备的专利特征在被控侵权物上面能够找到该特征的等同替换物此种情况下...

Full-text omitted.

 

陈顺弟与浙江乐雪儿家居用品有限公司、何建华、温士丹侵害发明专利权纠纷提审案

 (最高法院判决陈顺弟诉浙江乐雪儿公司等侵害发明专利权纠纷案——改变方法专利的步骤顺序并不必然构成等同侵权)

 裁判要旨
 改变方法专利的步骤顺序不构成等同侵权的判断标准是,所涉步骤必须以特定的顺序实施以及这种顺序改变能够带来技术功能或者技术效果的实质性差异。
 案情
 陈顺弟系“布塑热水袋的加工方法”发明专利(授权日为2010年2月17日)的权利人。该专利权利要求为:“1.布塑热水袋的加工方法,布塑热水袋由袋体、袋口和袋塞所组成,所述的袋体有内层、外层和保温层,在袋体的边缘有粘合边,所述的袋塞是螺纹塞座和螺纹塞盖,螺纹塞座的外壁有复合层,螺纹塞盖有密封垫片,袋塞中的螺纹塞座是聚丙烯材料,复合层是聚氯乙烯材料,密封垫片是硅胶材料所制成,其特征在于:第一步:首先取内层、保温层以及外层材料;第二步:将内层、保温层、外层依次层叠,成为组合层;第三步:将两层组合层对应重叠,采用高频热合机按照热水袋的形状对两层组合层边缘进行高频热粘合;第四步:对高频热粘合的热水袋进行分只裁剪;第五步:取聚丙烯材料注塑螺纹塞座,再把螺纹塞座作为嵌件放入模具,另外取聚氯乙烯材料在螺纹塞座外二次注塑复合层;第六步:将有复合层的螺纹塞座安入袋口内,与内层接触,采用高频热合机对热水袋口部与螺纹塞座复合层进行热粘合;第七步:对热水袋袋体进行修边:第八步:取塑料材料注制螺纹塞盖;第九步:取硅胶材料注制密封垫片;第十步:将密封垫片和螺纹塞盖互相装配后旋入螺纹塞座中;第十一步:充气试压检验,向热水袋充入压缩空气进行耐压试验;第十二步:包装。” 本案专利说明书在第3页中明确记载第10、11步的步骤可以调换。
 陈顺弟认为浙江乐雪儿家居用品有限公司(以下简称乐雪儿公司)生产、销售,何建华销售和许诺销售的布塑热水袋侵犯了本案专利权,诉请法院判令何建华立即停止销售侵权产品,赔偿其经济损失50万元;乐雪儿公司立即停止制造、销售侵权产品,销毁侵权产品及模具,并赔偿其经济损失100万元。
 裁判
 辽宁省沈阳市中级人民法院经审理认为,被诉侵权方法前4步及最后一步与本案专利权利要求1的前4步及最后一步相同;被诉侵权方法第6、7、8、10步分别与本案专利权利要求1的第7、6、11、10步的内容相同,虽顺序不同,但仍构成相等同技术特征;乐雪儿公司关于被诉侵权方法缺少本案专利权利要求1加工螺纹塞座、螺纹塞盖和密封垫片的第5、8、9步的主张不能成立,故认定乐雪儿公司生产被诉侵权产品的方法落入本案专利权保护范围,判令乐雪儿公司停止侵权行为,赔偿陈顺弟经济损失及合理费用30万元。乐雪儿公司上诉后,辽宁省高级人民法院二审维持了一审法院对乐雪儿公司的上述判决。
 乐雪儿公司不服二审判决,向最高人民法院申请再审。
 ......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥400.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese