涉专利纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例

一、山东晟新鞋业有限公司与济南凌云鞋业有限公司侵害外观设计专利权纠纷再审案

Shandong Shengxin Footwear Co., Ltd. v. Jinan Linyun Footwear Co., Ltd. (retrial case regarding dispute over infringement upon design patent right)

【裁判摘要】

当事人一方依据《注册商标、专利独占使用权许可合同》依法享有专利独占许可使用权，是案涉专利的独占许可使用权人，发生纠纷时依法享有诉讼主体资格。如果合同没有其他约定的生效条件，专利独占使用权许可合同一经签署即生效，合同是否备案对诉讼主体资格不产生影响，因为备案不是专利实施许可合同的生效要件，也就不影响被许可人诉讼主体资格的认定。

[Judgment Abstract]

A party to a contract for the exclusive right to use a registered trademark and patent is the exclusive user of the patent involved and thus enjoys the right to sue as a litigation subject when a dispute arises. A contract for the exclusive right to use a patent should come into effect upon its execution unless there are other conditions for the effectiveness of the contract. Whether the contract is put on record has nothing to do with the determination of the qualification for a litigation subject, since the recordation procedure is not an essential component for a patent license agreement to come into effect, and should not affect the determination of the licensee's qualification as a litigation subject.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.430939007

[CLI Code] CLI.C.430939007(EN)     

二、段体奎、祥云尚乘家居有限公司等侵害发明专利权纠纷民事二审民事判决书

Duan Tikui v. Xiangyun Shangcheng Interior Manufacturing Co., Ltd. et al. (civil judgment for second-instance trial of dispute over infringement upon patent for invention)

【裁判摘要】

在涉及新产品制造方法的发明专利侵权纠纷中，为了更好地保护专利权人的利益，法律规定了举证责任倒置，即由制造同样产品的单位或者个人应当提供其产品制造方法不同于专利方法的证明。但是，由于法律规定的举证责任倒置针对的是新产品制造方法专利侵权纠纷，故权利人需提供证据初步证明依照专利方法制造的产品属于新产品，且被诉侵权人制造的产品与依照专利方法制造的产品属于同样的产品。否则，不应适用举证责任倒置规定。

[Judgment Abstract]

In disputes over the infringement upon an invention patent relating to the new manufacturing process of a product, the law has a provision for reverse onus in order to better protect the interests of the patentee. It means that any entity or individual manufacturing a certain identical product should provide proof on the difference between its own product manufacturing process and the patented process. However, the provision for reverse onus is, as per the law, applicable to disputes over the infringement upon patents relating to the new manufacturing process of a product. Hence, the patentee should produce preliminary proof that the product manufactured with the patented process is a new product, and the product manufactured by the sued infringer is identical to the aforesaid product. Otherwise, the reverse onus provision is not applicable.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10942912

[CLI Code] CLI.C.10942912(EN)    

三、李昂、盛广济与中国科学院微生物研究所专利权权属纠纷二审判决书

Li Ang and Sheng Guangji v. The Institute of Microbiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (civil judgment for second-instance trial of dispute over patent ownership)

【裁判摘要】

两个以上单位或者个人合作完成的发明创造，申请专利的权利属于完成或者共同完成的单位或者个人。实践中，行为人为专利载明的发明人之一，但未能提供证据证明其与权利人存在合作开发关系，二者也不存在劳动关系，不能仅因其参与发明过程即认定其与专利申请单位共同享有专利权。故行为人主张发明专利权应当由其与权利人共同所有没有法律依据。

[Judgment Abstract]

For a collaborative invention completed by two or more individuals or entities, the right to apply for a patent shall remain with the individuals or entities that complete the invention independently or collaboratively. In the present case, the party, as one of the inventors stated in the patent, fails to provide proof for its collaborative patent development relationship with the patentee. And as there is no employment relationship between them, it should not be determined that the said party has joint ownership of the patent with the entity which applies for the patent solely on the grounds that the party has participated in the process of invention. Therefore, it is legally groundless for such party to claim for the co-ownership of the patent with the patentee.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.431148070

[CLI Code] CLI.C.431148070(EN)