台湾某科技公司诉深圳某公司实用新型专利侵权案件

       台湾某科技公司就mp3随身听以及手机设有的耳机连接元件在中国大陆申请实用新型专利，专利授权后发现深圳某公司在互联网上许诺销售的电连接元件涉嫌侵犯其实用新型专利权。我所律师接受委托后，首先对深圳某公司进行许诺销售涉嫌侵权产品的互联网网页进行公证保全，然后对网页中显示的电连接元件其结构进行分析，初步判断所涉元器件已落入上述实用新型专利的保护范围。为了证实该实用新型具备专利性，我们随后向国家知识产权局申请对该专利进行检索。不久，国家知识产权局经文献检索出具了《实用新型专利检索报告》，该报告认为所涉及的实用新型专利具备新颖性和创造性。在此基础上，台湾某科技公司正式委托我所律师在深圳中级法院起诉深圳某公司侵犯其实用新型专利权，同时向法院申请对被告仓库内的涉嫌侵权产品采取证据保全措施。法官在律师的配合下从被告的仓库里保全到被告制造的电连接元件。在开庭审理过程中，虽然被告极力否认其行为不构成对原告专利权的侵犯，但由于原告出具了大量确凿的证据，最终法庭认定被告的行为已构成对原告专利权的侵犯，并支持了原告的诉讼请求，判令被告立即停止制造、销售、许诺销售专利侵权产品，赔偿原告经济损失人民币10余万元。

        A Taiwan science and technology company Vs. Shenzhen company for utility model patent infringement
        Taiwan science and technology company was granted patent right on its electrical connection parts for MP3 player and headphones in mobile phone. The Taiwan company realized Shenzhen company introduced the electrical connection parts chips on its webpage. At first, our lawyer got the involving webpage notarized as evidence for offering for sale and involved technical features. Based on technical content on the webpage, our lawyer give preliminary analysis on patent infringement with client’s technical confirmation. After we got the Utility Model Search Report from SIPO to support novelty and inventiveness of client’s utility model patent, client entrusted our lawyers to lodge infringement litigation in the Shenzhen Intermediate Court. Our lawyer managed to get the Court’s permission on the request for evidence preservation by Court. The Judge visited the Defendant’s factory and got samples as material evidence in litigation. In the evidence check and hearing session, the Defendant denied infringement but was not able to provide enough rebuttal evidence. The Court confirmed the defendant’s infringement on plaintiff’s patent, and should stop the infringement immediately and compensated Plaintiff’s damages more than RMB 100,000.