20

2017-04

Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination (2017)


 Guidelines for Patent Infringement Determination (2017)

(April 20, 2017)

I. Determination of Protection Scope of Patent for Invention or Utility Model

一、发明、实用新型专利权保护范围的确定

(I) Principle of Interpretation for Determination of Protection Scope

(一)确定保护范围的解释原则

1. Patent validity principle. Before the declaration of invalidation of the patent alleged by the right holder, the rights thereof shall be protected, and no ruling or judgment shall be rendered on the grounds that the patent does not conform to the relevant conditions for grant of a patent as provided in the Patent Law and shall be declared invalid, unless otherwise specified in the Guidelines.

1专利权有效原则。在权利人据以主张的专利权未被宣告无效之前,其权利应予保护,不得以该专利权不符合专利法相关授权条件、应被宣告无效为由作出裁判。但是,本指南另有规定的除外。

A duplicate copy of the Patent Register, or the patent certificate together with the receipt of annual patent fees of the year in which the lawsuit is filed, may serve as the evidence for validity of the patent.

专利登记簿副本,或者专利证书和当年缴纳专利年费的收据可以作为证明专利权有效的证据。

2. Fairness principle. When interpreting the claims, full consideration shall be given to the contributions made by the patent to the prior art so as to reasonably delimit the protection scope of the claims and protect the interests of the right holder, and also given to the public notice function of the claims and the reliance interests of the public, and the contents ineligible for protection should not be interpreted to be within the protection scope of the claims.

2公平原则。解释权利要求时,不仅要充分考虑专利对现有技术所做的贡献,合理界定专利权利要求限定的保护范围,保护权利人的利益,还要充分考虑权利要求的公示作用,兼顾社会公众的信赖利益,不能把不应纳入保护的内容解释到权利要求的范围当中。

The contents ineligible for patent protection include:

下列情形属于不应纳入保护范围的内容:

(1) A technical solution containing a technical defect to be overcome by the patent;

1)专利所要克服的技术缺陷的技术方案;

(2) A technical solution which, in its entirety, belongs to the prior art.

2)整体上属于现有技术的技术方案。

3. Eclectic principle. The claims shall be interpreted on the basis of the technical contents contained therein, and the protection scope of the patent shall be reasonably determined in light of the factors including the description and drawings, the prior art, the contribution made by the patent to the prior art, etc.; the protection scope of the patent shall neither be limited to the literal meanings of the claims, nor be expanded to the contents which a person with ordinary skills in the art can envisage with creative efforts after reading the description and drawings before the filing date of the application for patent.

3折衷原则。解释权利要求时,应当以权利要求记载的技术内容为准,根据说明书及附图、现有技术、专利对现有技术所做的贡献等因素合理确定专利权的保护范围。既不能将专利权的保护范围拘泥于权利要求书的字面含义,也不能将专利权的保护范围扩展到本领域普通技术人员在专利申请日前通过阅读说明书及附图后需要经过创造性劳动才能联想到的内容。

4. The principle of compliance with the object of invention. In the determination of the protection scope of the patent, a technical solution incapable of realizing the object and effect of the invention shall not be interpreted to be within the protection scope of the claims, that is, a technical solution which is determined by a person with ordinary skills in the art as still incapable of solving the technical problem of the patent or realizing the technical effect of the patent on the basis of the background art after reading all the contents of the description and drawings shall not be interpreted to be within the protection scope of the patent.

4符合发明目的原则。在确定专利权保护范围时,不应将不能实现发明目的、效果的技术方案解释到权利要求的保护范围中,即不应当将本领域普通技术人员在结合本领域的技术背景的基础上,在阅读了说明书及附图的全部内容之后,仍然认为不能解决专利的技术问题、实现专利的技术效果的技术方案解释到专利权的保护范围内。

(II) Objects to be Interpreted

(二)解释对象

5. In the trial of a case of dispute over infringement of a patent for invention or utility model, the protection scope of the patent shall be firstly determined. The protection scope of the patent for invention or utility model shall be determined on the basis of the contents defined by the technical features stated in the claims, including the contents defined by the technical features equivalent to the stated technical features.

5审理侵犯发明或者实用新型专利权纠纷案件,应当首先确定专利权的保护范围。发明或者实用新型专利权的保护范围应当以权利要求记载的技术特征所确定的内容为准,也包括与所记载的技术特征相等同的技术特征所确定的内容。

In the determination of the protection scope of the patent, interpretation shall be made to the relevant claims alleged by the right holder as the right basis, and the technical features of the claims shall be divided.

确定专利权保护范围时,应当对权利人作为权利依据所主张的相关权利要求进行解释,并对该权利要求进行技术特征的划分。

6. Where there are two or more claims in the claim set, the right holder shall clearly state the specific claims in the complaint. Where the claims are not specified, or specified unclearly in the complaint, the right holder is required to make clarification; if after elucidation, the right holder makes no clarification before the close of the court debate at the first instance, the court may rule to dismiss the lawsuit.

6权利要求书有两项以上权利要求的,权利人应当在起诉状中载明具体的权利要求。起诉状对此未记载或者记载不明的,应当要求权利人明确;经释明,权利人在一审法庭辩论终结前不予明确的,可以裁定驳回起诉。

7. Where the right holder alleges to determine the protection scope on the basis of a dependent claim, the protection scope of the patent shall be determined on the basis of the additional technical features stated in this dependent claim along with the technical features stated in the claim which this dependent claim directly or indirectly refers to.

7权利人主张以从属权利要求确定保护范围的,应当以该从属权利要求记载的附加技术特征及其直接或间接引用的权利要求记载的技术特征,一并确定专利权的保护范围。

8. A technical feature refers to the minimum technical unit in the technical solution defined in a claim that is able to relatively independently perform certain technical function(s) and generate relatively independent technical effect(s). In a technical solution relating to a product, the technical unit generally refers to a component(s) of the product and/or the connecting relationship between the components of the product. In a technical solution relating to a process, the technical unit generally refers to a process step(s), or the relationship between the steps.

8技术特征是指在权利要求所限定的技术方案中,能够相对独立地执行一定的技术功能、并能产生相对独立的技术效果的最小技术单元。在产品技术方案中,该技术单元一般是产品的部件和/或部件之间的连接关系。在方法技术方案中,该技术单元一般是方法步骤或者步骤之间的关系。

9. Before the first-instance judgment is made, where the claims alleged by the right holder are declared invalid by the Patent Reexamination Board (PRB) and the right holder fails to change the alleged claims timely, the court may rule to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the right holder based on the invalidated claims.

9在一审判决作出前,权利人所主张的权利要求被专利复审委员会宣告无效,权利人没有及时变更主张的权利要求的,可以裁定驳回权利人基于该被宣告无效的权利要求的起诉。

Where there is evidence proving that the PRB's decision to declare the above claims invalid is revoked by a binding administrative judgment, the right holder may file a lawsuit separately on the basis of the above claims.

有证据证明专利复审委员会宣告上述权利要求无效的决定被生效的行政判决撤销的,权利人可以另行起诉。

Where the right holder files a lawsuit separately, the time limit of action shall be counted from the date of service of the administrative judgment. Where there is evidence proving that the accused act still exists during the administrative action, the right holder can claim relevant rights when filing the lawsuit separately.

权利人另行起诉的,诉讼时效期间从行政判决书送达之日起计算。有证据证明在行政诉讼期间被诉侵权行为一直在持续的,权利人另行起诉时可以就此主张权利。

10. Where the party concerned institutes an appeal with the second-instance court as being not satisfied with the first-instance judgment and the claims on which the first-instance judgment is based were declared invalid by the PRB before the final judgment, the first-instance judgment generally shall be revoked to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the patent holder on the basis of the invalidated claims. However, where there is evidence proving that the patentee filed an administrative lawsuit against the decision on invalidation within a statutory time limit, the court may rule to suspend the trial of the second-instance case at the request of the party concerned after comprehensively considering such factors as evidence on record, technical difficulty of the patent in suit and the defendant's grounds of defense.

10当事人不服一审判决向二审法院提起上诉,在终审判决作出前,一审判决所依据的权利要求被专利复审委员会宣告无效的,一般应当撤销一审判决,裁定驳回权利人基于该被宣告无效的权利要求的起诉。但是,有证据证明专利权人在法定期限内针对无效决定提起行政诉讼,在综合考虑在案证据、涉案专利技术难度、被告抗辩理由等因素的情况下,根据当事人的申请,可以裁定中止二审案件的审理。

Where there is evidence proving that the PRB's decision to declare the claims invalid was revoked by a binding administrative judgment and the right holder has filed a lawsuit separately, the court shall make a judgment with reference to the facts and evidence ascertained in the original first-instance judgment when no new facts are found.

有证据证明专利复审委员会宣告上述权利要求无效的决定被生效的行政判决撤销,权利人另行起诉的,在没有新的事实的情况下,应当参照原一审判决认定的事实和证据做出判决。

(III) Methods for Interpretation

(三)解释方法

11. The determination of the protection scope of the patent shall be based on the claims in the patent documents announced and granted by the patent administration department under the State Council, or the claims determined by the legally effective decision on the request for invalidation and relevant administrative judgment on affirmation of the patent right. Where there is more than one version of claims, the ultimate valid version shall prevail.

11确定专利权的保护范围时,应当以国务院专利行政部门公告授权的专利文本或者已经发生法律效力的无效宣告请求审查决定及相关的确权行政判决所确定的权利要求为准。权利要求存在多个文本的,以最终有效的文本为准。

12. The claims shall be interpreted from the perspective of a person with ordinary skills in the art.

12解释权利要求应当从本领域普通技术人员的角度进行。

A person with ordinary skills in the art is a hypothetical “person” who is presumed to be aware of all the common technical knowledge and have access to all the technologies existing in the art prior to the filing date, and have the capacity to apply all the routine experimental means prior to the filing date.

本领域普通技术人员,是一种假设的,他能够获知该领域中所有的现有技术,知晓申请日之前该技术领域所有的普通技术知识,并且具有运用该申请日之前常规实验手段的能力。

A person with ordinary skills in the art does not specifically refer to one person or one type of person, and cannot be labelled by reference to such specific standards like education background, professional title and rank. Where there is any disagreement arising from the party concerned over whether a person with ordinary skills in the art is aware of some common technical knowledge and has the capacity to apply certain routine experimental means, evidence shall be produced.

所属本领域普通技术人员,不是指具体的某一个人或某一类人,不宜用文化程度、职称、级别等具体标准来参照套用。当事人对本领域普通技术人员是否知晓某项普通技术知识以及运用某种常规实验手段的能力有争议的,应当举证证明。

13. There are three forms of interpretation of claims, including, but not limited to, clarification, remedy, and amendment in particular cases, that is, clarifying the meaning of a technical feature in a claim when the technical feature fails to convey clear technical contents; remedying the deficiencies in a technical feature of a claim when the technical feature is defective; and amending the meaning of a technical feature in a claim in particular cases, such as when contradiction exists between technical features.

13对权利要求的解释,包括但不限于澄清、弥补和特定情况下的修正三种形式,即当权利要求中的技术特征所表达的技术内容不清楚时,澄清该技术特征的含义;当权利要求中的技术特征存在瑕疵时,弥补该技术特征的不足;当权利要求中的技术特征之间存在矛盾等特定情况时,修正该技术特征的含义。

14. The technical contents as conveyed by all the technical features stated in the claim generally shall be treated as an entire technical solution. The technical features in the preamble portion and the characterizing portion of independent claims, as well as in the referencing portion and the limiting portion of dependent claims, shall define the protection scope.

14一般应当将权利要求中记载的全部技术特征所表达的技术内容作为一个整体技术方案对待。独立权利要求的前序部分、特征部分以及从属权利要求的引用部分、限定部分记载的技术特征,对于保护范围具有限定作用。

Where a claim includes two or more parallel technical solutions, each parallel technical solution shall be separately determined as an entire technical solution.

权利要求包含两个以上的并列技术方案的,应当将每个并列技术方案分别确定为一个整体技术方案。

15. For the purpose of interpreting a claim, reference can be made to the contents stated in the description and drawings of the patent, relevant claims in the claim set, other patents divided from the patent in suit and the contents recited in the patent examination dossiers and effective legal documents during the granting and affirming (invalidation and following appeals) procedures of the abovementioned patents.

15解释权利要求,可以使用专利说明书及附图、权利要求书中的相关权利要求、与涉案专利存在分案申请关系的其他专利以及上述专利的专利审查档案、生效的专利授权确权裁判文书所记载的内容。

Where the meaning of the claim still cannot be clearly determined by resorting to the abovementioned means, interpretation may be made by referring to public literature, such as reference books and textbooks, and to the conventional understanding by a person with ordinary skills in the art.

上述方法仍不能明确权利要求含义的,可以结合工具书、教科书等公知文献及本领域普通技术人员的通常理解进行解释。

The patent examination dossiers herein include the written materials submitted by the patent applicant or patentee, office actions, interview records, memorandum of oral proceedings, effective decisions on request for reexamination and request for invalidation issued by patent administration department under the State Council and PRB in the procedures of examination, reexamination and invalidation.

本指南所称专利审查档案,包括专利审查、复审、无效程序中专利申请人或者专利权人提交的书面材料,国务院专利行政部门及其专利复审委员会制作的审查意见通知书、会晤记录、口头审理记录、生效的专利复审请求审查决定书和专利权无效宣告请求审查决定书等。

16. Where there is any inconsistency or contradiction between the claims and the description of the patent, which obviously violates the provision of Articles 26.3 & 26.4 of the Patent Law and thus results in that the description cannot be used to interpret the claims, the parties concerned shall be informed to resolve the dispute through the patent invalidation proceedings. Where a party concerned has initiated the patent invalidation proceedings accordingly and applied to suspend the trial of the present lawsuit, the court may rule to suspend the lawsuit.

16权利要求与专利说明书出现不一致或者相互矛盾,明显违反专利法二十六条第三款、第四款导致说明书无法用于解释权利要求的,告知当事人通过专利无效宣告程序解决。当事人据此启动专利无效宣告程序并申请中止本案审理的,可以裁定中止诉讼。

Where the party concerned clearly rejects to resolve the dispute through the patent invalidation proceedings, or fails to file a request for invalidation of the patent within a reasonable time limit, in accordance with the patent validity principle, the protection scope shall be determined according to the literal meaning of the claims. Provided that a person with ordinary skills in the art, by reading the claims, the description and drawings, can attain a specific, definite and sole interpretation of implementation of the claimed technical solution, misrepresentation in the claims shall be clarified or amended based on this interpretation.

当事人明确表示拒绝通过专利无效程序解决,或者未在合理期限内提起专利权无效宣告请求的,应当按照专利权有效原则,以权利要求的字面含义所确定的保护范围为准。但是本领域普通技术人员通过阅读权利要求书和说明书及附图,能够对实现要求保护的技术方案得出具体、确定、唯一的解释的,应当根据该解释来澄清或者修正权利要求中的错误表述。

Where the protection scope of the patent cannot be determined according to the preceding paragraph, the court may decide to reject the plaintiff's claims.

根据本条第二款仍然不能确定专利权的保护范围,可以判决驳回原告诉讼请求。

17. When interpreting the claims and determining the protection scope of the claims recited in the claim set, it can be presumed that the protection scope of an independent claim is different from that of its dependent claims. The protection scope of the independent claim is larger than that of its dependent claims, and the protection scope of a preceding dependent claim is larger than that of a subsequent claim dependent on the preceding one, unless a person with ordinary skills in the art could obtain a contrary interpretation of the claims according to internal evidence such as the description and drawings of the patent, and the patent examination dossiers.

17在解释权利要求、确定权利要求书中记载权利要求的保护范围时,可以推定独立权利要求与其从属权利要求所限定的保护范围互不相同。独立权利要求的保护范围大于其从属权利要求的保护范围,在前从属权利要求的保护范围大于在后引用该在前从属权利要求的保护范围,但本领域普通技术人员根据专利说明书及附图、专利审查档案等内部证据,可以做出相反解释的除外。

18. In respect of a functional technical feature in a claim which is represented in terms of function or effect, the content of this technical feature shall be determined by referring to the specific mode for achieving the functions or effects as disclosed in the description and drawings and to the equivalents thereof.

18对于权利要求中以功能或者效果表述的功能性特征,应当结合说明书及附图描述的该功能或者效果的具体实施方式及其等同的实施方式,确定该技术特征的内容。

A functional technical feature refers to a technical feature in a claim which defines the structure, composition, material, steps, conditions or the relationship therebetween by the function they perform or the effect they achieve in the invention-creation. Those falling within the following circumstances shall not be identified as functional technical features:

功能性特征,是指对于结构、组分、材料、步骤、条件或其之间的关系等,通过其在发明创造中所起的功能或者效果进行限定的技术特征。下列情形一般不宜认定为功能性特征:

(1) Technical features which are described in terms of functions or effects and have become technical terms that are well-known among persons with ordinary skills in the art, or which are described in terms of functions or effects and through which the specific mode for achieving the functions or effects can be directly and definitely determined by only reading the claims;

1)以功能或效果性语言表述且已经成为本领域普通技术人员普遍知晓的技术术语,或以功能或效果性语言表述且仅通过阅读权利要求即可直接、明确地确定实现上述功能或者效果的具体实施方式的技术特征;

(2) Technical features which are described in terms of functions or effects, and which are also described in terms of structure, compositions, material, steps, conditions, etc.

2)使用功能性或效果性语言表述,但同时也用相应的结构、组分、材料、步骤、条件等特征进行描述的技术特征。

19. In the determination of the content of a functional technical feature, the functional technical feature shall be defined as the corresponding features of structure and steps disclosed in the description and drawings that are indispensable for achieving the said function and effect.

19在确定功能性特征的内容时,应当将功能性特征限定为说明书及附图中所对应的为实现所述功能、效果不可缺少的结构、步骤特征。

20. Where a process claim of a patent defines expressly the sequence of steps, the steps per se and the sequence of steps shall have a limiting effect on the protection scope of the patent; where a process claim of a patent does not expressly define the sequence of steps, this shall not serve as an excuse for not taking into account the limiting effect of the sequence of steps on the claim, and determination as to whether the steps shall be carried out in a specific sequence shall be made from the perspective of a person with ordinary skills in the art by referring to the description and drawings, the entire technical solution stated in the claim, the logic relationship between steps and the patent examination dossiers.

20方法专利权利要求对步骤顺序有明确限定的,步骤本身以及步骤之间的顺序均应对专利权的保护范围起到限定作用;方法专利权利要求对步骤顺序没有明确限定的,不应以此为由,不考虑步骤顺序对权利要求的限定作用,而应当结合说明书及附图、权利要求记载的整体技术方案、各个步骤之间的逻辑关系以及专利审查档案,从本领域普通技术人员的角度出发,确定各步骤是否应当按照特定的顺序实施。

21. The technical features which define the product by the preparation method function to delimit the protection scope of the patent. Where the preparation method for an accused product is neither identical nor equivalent to the patented method, the court shall determine that the accused technical solution does not fall within the protection scope of the patent.

21以制备方法界定产品的技术特征对于确定专利权的保护范围具有限定作用。被诉侵权产品的制备方法与专利方法既不相同也不等同的,应当认定被诉侵权技术方案未落入专利权的保护范围。

22. Where a claim of a patent for utility model contains any non-shape, non-structure technical feature, the technical feature shall function to delimit the protection scope of the patent.

22实用新型专利权利要求中包含非形状、非构造技术特征的,该技术特征对确定专利权的保护范围具有限定作用。

A non-shape, non-structure technical feature refers to a technical feature stated in a claim of a patent for utility model, which does not belong to the shape, the structure or the combination thereof, such as the use, manufacturing process, manner of use or composition (content of components, proportion).

非形状、非构造技术特征,是指实用新型专利权利要求中记载的不属于产品的形状、构造或者其结合等的技术特征,如用途、制造工艺、使用方法、材料成分(组分、配比)等。

23. Where a claim of a patent for product invention or utility model does not define the field of application or the use, the field of application or the use generally does not function to delimit the protection scope of the patent.

23产品发明或者实用新型专利权利要求未限定应用领域、用途的,应用领域、用途一般对专利权的保护范围不起限定作用。

24. Usage environment features incorporated into the claims function to delimit the protection scope of the patent. Where the accused technical solution is applicable under the usage environments recited in the claims, it shall be determined that the accused technical solution possesses the usage environment features stated in the patent claims. The actual use of the environment features in the accused technical solution is not the prerequisite. Nevertheless, where the patent documents explicitly define that the technical solution is applicable merely under the usage environments and there is evidence proving that the accused technical solution is applicable under other usage environments, the accused technical solution does not fall within the protection scope of the patent.

24写入权利要求的使用环境特征对专利权的保护范围具有限定作用。被诉侵权技术方案能够适用于权利要求记载的使用环境的,应当认定被诉侵权技术方案具备了权利要求记载的使用环境特征,而不以被诉侵权技术方案实际使用该环境特征为前提。但是,专利文件明确限定该技术方案仅能适用于该使用环境特征,有证据证明被诉侵权技术方案可以适用于其他使用环境的,则被诉侵权技术方案未落入专利权的保护范围。

Where the accused technical solution is not applicable under the usage environments defined by the usage environment features in the claims, it shall be determined that the accused technical solution does not fall within the protection scope of the patent.

被诉侵权技术方案不能适用于权利要求中使用环境特征所限定的使用环境的,应当认定被诉侵权技术方案未落入专利权的保护范围。

Different from the subject matter, usage environment features refer to technical features in a claim which are used to describe the background or conditions under which the invention or utility model applies and which are in connection or cooperation with the technical solution.

使用环境特征不同于主题名称,是指权利要求中用来描述发明或实用新型所使用的背景或者条件且与该技术方案存在连接或配合关系的技术特征。

25. Where technical contents contained in the subject matter, such as the field of application, use or structure, have an effect on the technical solution protected by the claim, the technical contents function to delimit the protection scope of the patent.

25主题名称中所包含的应用领域、用途或者结构等技术内容对权利要求所要保护的技术方案产生影响的,则该技术内容对专利权的保护范围具有限定作用。

The subject matter is an abstract generalization of the technical solution constituted by all the technical features contained in the claim and a simple name of the technical solution of the patent. The technical solution generalized by the subject matter needs to be embodied by all the technical features of the claim.

主题名称是对权利要求包含的全部技术特征所构成的技术方案的抽象概括,是对专利技术方案的简单命名,其代表的技术方案需要通过权利要求的全部技术特征来体现。

26. A claim that is written in a “consisting of” format is a closed-ended claim, and generally shall be interpreted as not including the structural components or process steps that are not stated in the claim.

26采用……组成表达方式的权利要求为封闭式权利要求,一般应解释为不含有权利要求所述以外的结构组成部分或方法步骤。

The compositions in a closed-ended claim in pharmaceutical and chemical fields jointly work based on their respective characteristics and can achieve a particular technical effect without other substances, except for the claims regarding Chinese herbal compositions.

医药、化学领域中涉及组分的封闭式权利要求是基于每个组分各自的特性而共同发生作用,无需其他物质即可产生特定的技术效果,但中药组合物权利要求除外。

27. Where the description provides an explanation of a technical term which is different from the ordinary meaning of the technical term, the explanation provided by the description shall prevail.

27说明书对技术术语的解释与该技术术语的通用含义不同的,以说明书的解释为准。

Where a technical term is endowed with other meaning before the occurrence of the accused act, this technical term shall be interpreted as the meaning adopted on the filing date of the patent.

被诉侵权行为发生时,技术术语已经产生其它含义的,应当采用专利申请日时的含义解释该技术术语。

28. A self-coined word used by the patentee in the patent documents shall be interpreted according to the particular meaning in the description. If the description fails to provide a definite definition, the self-coined word shall be understood in the relevant context of the description and interpreted as a meaning that most complies with the object of the invention. If the protection scope of the claims cannot be determined as the patentee fails to define the self-coined word in the description and meanwhile a person with ordinary skills in the art is unable to interpret it clearly according to the claims and in the context of the description, the court shall rule to reject the plaintiff's claims.

28对于专利权人在专利文件中的自定义词,应当依据说明书中的特定含义进行解释。如果说明书中没有明确定义的,应当根据说明书中与该自定义词相关的上下文加以理解,将其解释为最为符合发明目的的含义。如果专利权人在说明书中未对其自定义词的含义作出定义,同时本领域普通技术人员结合权利要求、说明书的上下文也无法予以清楚解释,导致无法确定权利要求的保护范围的,可以判决驳回原告诉讼请求。

29. Under normal circumstances, identical terms in the patent documents shall be interpreted as having the same meaning. Different terms are presumed to have different meanings, unless it can be determined that the different terms have the same meaning according to the description or conventional understanding of a person with ordinary skills in the art.

29在一份专利文件中,通常情况下相同的术语应当解释为具有相同的含义。不同的术语推定具有不同的含义,除非根据说明书的记载或本领域普通技术人员的惯常理解可以确定不同的术语具有相同含义的除外。

30. The drawings of the description function to supplement the written portion of the description by graphs, so as to enable a person with ordinary skills in the art to intuitively and vividly understand each technical feature and the entire technical solution of the invention or utility model. Only the technical content that can be directly and unambiguously determined from the drawings by a person with ordinary skills in the art after reading the claims and description can be used to interpret the technical features in the claim.

30说明书附图的作用在于用图形补充说明书文字部分的描述,使本领域普通技术人员能够直观地、形象地理解发明或实用新型的每个技术特征和整体技术方案。只有本领域普通技术人员在阅读权利要求及说明书后,能够从附图中直接地、毫无疑义地确定的技术内容才能用于解释权利要求中技术特征的含义。

The contents presumed from the drawings, or the size or relationships that are not literally specified but measured from the drawings shall not be determined as the contents of the relevant technical feature.

由附图中推测的内容,或者无文字说明、仅仅是从附图中测量得出的尺寸及其关系,不应当作为相关技术特征的内容。

31. Reference signs can be used to assist in understanding the technical solution. Where reference signs are used in a claim, the technical features in the claim shall not be defined by the particular structures indicated by the reference signs.

31附图标记可以用来帮助理解技术方案,当权利要求中引用了附图标记时,不应以附图标记所反映出的具体结构来限定权利要求中的技术特征。

32. Patent claims are generally a reasonable generalization made on the basis of embodiments disclosed in the description or drawings. Embodiments are merely examples of the technical solution within the scope of the claims and are preferred modes for achieving the invention or utility model as deemed by the patent applicant. The protection scope of a patent shall not be restricted by the particular embodiments disclosed in the description, except in the following circumstances:

32专利权利要求一般是在说明书或者附图公开的实施例的基础上进行的合理概括,实施例仅仅是权利要求范围内技术方案的示例,是专利申请人认为实现发明或者实用新型的优选方式。专利权的保护范围不应受说明书中公开的具体实施方式的限制,但下列情况除外:

(1) claims are in essence the technical solutions as presented in the embodiments;

1)权利要求实质上是实施方式所记载的技术方案的;

(2) claims contain functional features.

2)权利要求包括功能性特征的。

33. The abstract is intended for providing technological information and facilitating the public's search, but it cannot be used for determining the protection scope of the patent or for interpreting claims.

33摘要的作用是提供技术信息,便于公众进行检索,不能用于确定专利权的保护范围,也不能用于解释权利要求。

34. Where misprints in the patent documents affect the determination of the protection scope of the patent, correction may be made on the basis of the patent examination dossiers of the patent.

34当专利文件中的印刷错误影响到专利权保护范围的确定时,可以依据专利审查档案进行修正。

Obviously wrong or ambiguous grammar, words, punctuations, graphs, signs, etc. in the claims, description and drawings, of which a sole and only understanding can be acquired from the claims, description and drawings, shall be determined based on the sole and only understanding.

权利要求书、说明书及附图中的语法、文字、标点、图形、符号等存有明显错误或歧义,但通过阅读权利要求书、说明书及附图可以得出唯一理解的,应当根据该唯一理解予以认定。

II. Determination of Infringement on Patent for Invention or Utility Model

二、发明、实用新型专利权的侵权判定

(I) Rule and method for comparing technical features

(一)技术特征的比对原则及方法

35. All elements rule. The all elements rule is the basic principle to judge whether a technical solution infringes the patent for invention or utility model. To be specific, in the determination as to whether the accused technical solution falls within the protection scope of the patent, an examination shall be conducted on all the technical features stated in the claim alleged by the right holder, and a comparison shall also be conducted between all the technical features stated in the claim and all the corresponding technical features in the accused technical solution one by one. Where the accused technical solution contains the technical features that are identical or equivalent to all the technical features of the claim, it shall be determined that the accused technical solution falls within the protection scope of the patent.

35全面覆盖原则。全面覆盖原则是判断一项技术方案是否侵犯发明或者实用新型专利权的基本原则。具体含义是指,在判定被诉侵权技术方案是否落入专利权的保护范围,应当审查权利人主张的权利要求所记载的全部技术特征,并以权利要求中记载的全部技术特征与被诉侵权技术方案所对应的全部技术特征逐一进行比较。被诉侵权技术方案包含与权利要求记载的全部技术特征相同或者等同的技术特征的,应当认定其落入专利权的保护范围。

36. In the determination of infringement, the patented product provided by the party concerned shall not be directly compared with the accused technical solution, but the patented product can be used to facilitate the understanding of the relevant technical features and technical solution.

36进行侵权判定,不应以当事人提供的专利产品与被诉侵权技术方案直接进行比对,但专利产品可以帮助理解有关技术特征与技术方案。

37. Where both the right holder and the accused infringer hold patent rights, their patented products or the claims of their patents generally cannot be directly compared.

37权利人、被诉侵权人均有专利权时,一般不能将双方专利产品或者双方专利的权利要求进行比对。

(II) Identical Infringement

(二)相同侵权

38. Where the accused technical solution comprises corresponding technical features that are identical to all the technical features stated in an entire technical solution of the claim, literal infringement, namely infringement in literal sense, will be found.

38被诉侵权技术方案包含了与权利要求限定的一项完整技术方案记载的全部技术特征相同的对应技术特征,属于相同侵权,即字面含义上的侵权。

39. Where the technical features stated in the claim are described in upper level terms, and the corresponding technical features of the accused technical solution are described in lower level terms, it shall be determined that the corresponding technical features of the accused technical solution constitute identical technical features.

39当权利要求中记载的技术特征采用上位概念,而被诉侵权技术方案的相应技术特征采用的是相应的下位概念的,应认定构成相同技术特征。

40. Where the accused technical solution comprises all the technical features of a claim and is also added with new technical features, it still falls within the protection scope of the patent, unless the new technical feature is definitely excluded from the patent documents.

40被诉侵权技术方案在包含了权利要求中的全部技术特征的基础上,又增加了新的技术特征的,仍然落入专利权的保护范围,但专利文件明确排除该技术特征的除外。

41. Where the accused technical solution is added with new technical features on the basis of all the technical features in the closed-ended claim, it shall be determined that the accused technical solution does not fall within the protection scope of the patent, except for the circumstances where the added technical feature belongs to a conventional number of impurities which are inevitable in a close-ended claim directed to compositions in the pharmaceutical and chemical fields.

41被诉侵权技术方案在包含一项封闭式权利要求全部技术特征的基础上,增加其他技术特征的,应当认定被诉侵权技术方案未落入该权利要求的保护范围。但对于医药、化学领域中涉及组分的封闭式权利要求,该增加的技术特征属于不可避免的常规数量杂质的除外。

42. In respect of a claim comprising functional features, compared with the structural and step features prescribed in Article 19 of the Guidelines, where the corresponding structural and step features of the accused technical solution achieve the same function and generate the same effect by the same means, or, despite the differences, achieve the same function and generate the same effect by substantially the same means, and can be envisaged by a person with ordinary skills in the art at the filing date of the patent without making inventive effort, it shall be determined that the corresponding structural and step features are identical with the functional features.

42对于包含功能性特征的权利要求,与本指南第19条所述的结构、步骤特征相比,被诉侵权技术方案的相应结构、步骤特征是以相同的手段,实现了相同的功能,产生了相同的效果,或者虽有区别,但是以基本相同的手段,实现了相同的功能,达到相同的效果,而且本领域普通技术人员在专利申请日时无需经过创造性劳动就能够联想到的,应当认定该相应结构、步骤特征与上述功能性特征相同。

When judging whether the structural and step features constitute identical features, the structural and step features shall be regarded as one technical feature, rather than be divided into two or more technical features.

在判断上述结构、步骤特征是否构成相同特征时,应当将其作为一个技术特征,而不应将其区分为两个以上的技术特征。

43. Where the invention or utility model for which the patent is later granted belongs to improvement on the prior patent for invention or utility model, and where a claim of the later patent is added with other technical feature on the basis of all the technical features in a claim of the prior patent, the later patent belongs to a dependent patent. Implementing of the dependent patent falls within the protection scope of the prior patent.

43在后获得专利权的发明或实用新型是对在先发明或实用新型专利的改进,在后专利的某项权利要求记载了在先专利某项权利要求中记载的全部技术特征,又增加了另外的技术特征的,在后专利属于从属专利。实施从属专利落入在先专利的保护范围。

The patent is a dependent patent in the following circumstances:

下列情形属于从属专利:

(1) The claims of the later product patent are added with new technical features on the basis of all the technical features of the claims of the prior product patent;

1)在包含了在先产品专利权利要求的全部技术特征的基础上,增加了新的技术特征;

(2) On the basis of the claims of the original product patent, new use that is unknown before is found

2)在原有产品专利权利要求的基础上,发现了原来未曾发现的新的用途;

(3) On the basis of the claims of the original process patent, new technical feature is added.

3)在原有方法专利权利要求的基础上,增加了新的技术特征。

(III) Equivalent Infringement

(三)等同侵权

44. In the event that literal infringement fails to be found in the determination of patent infringement, the court shall judge whether equivalent infringement occurs.

44在专利侵权判定中,在相同侵权不成立的情况下,应当判断是否构成等同侵权。

Evidence shall suffice to prove that the accused technical solution constitutes equivalent infringement, and the right holder shall adduce evidence or make a detailed explanation.

被诉侵权技术方案构成等同侵权应当有充分的证据支持,权利人应当举证或进行充分说明。

45. The accused technical solution shall be determined as falling within the protection scope of the patent and constitutes equivalent infringement, when one or more technical features in the accused technical solution, though different in literal sense from the corresponding technical feature(s) in the claim, belong(s) to equivalent feature(s) of the latter.

45被诉侵权技术方案有一个或者一个以上技术特征与权利要求中的相应技术特征从字面上看不相同,但是属于等同特征,在此基础上,被诉侵权技术方案被认定落入专利权保护范围的,属于等同侵权。

Equivalent features refer to those which achieve substantially the same function and generate substantially the same effect by the means substantially the same as the technical features stated in the claim and can be envisaged by a person with ordinary skills in the art without making inventive effort.

等同特征,是指与权利要求所记载的技术特征以基本相同的手段,实现基本相同的功能,达到基本相同的效果,并且本领域普通技术人员无需经过创造性劳动就能够想到的技术特征。

In the judgment on equivalent features, the means is the technical content of the technical feature per se and the function and effect are the external characteristics of the technical feature, and the function and effect of the technical feature are decided by the means of the technical feature.

在是否构成等同特征的判断中,手段是技术特征本身的技术内容,功能和效果是技术特征的外部特性,技术特征的功能和效果取决于该技术特征的手段。

46. Substantially the same means indicates that the technical features of the accused technical solution are not essentially different from the corresponding technical features of the claim in terms of technical content.

46基本相同的手段,是指被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征在技术内容上并无实质性差异。

47. Substantially the same function indicates that the technical features of the accused technical solution and the corresponding technical features of the claim perform substantially the same function in their respective technical solutions. The fact that the technical features of the accused technical solution have other functions as compared with the corresponding technical features of the claim shall not be taken into account.

47基本相同的功能,是指被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征在各自技术方案中所起的作用基本相同。被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征相比还有其他作用的,不予考虑。

48. Substantially the same effect indicates that the technical features of the accused technical solution and the corresponding technical features of the claim achieve substantially the same technical effect in their respective technical solutions. The fact that the technical features of the accused technical solution achieve other technical effects as compared with the corresponding technical features of the claim shall not be taken into account.

48基本相同的效果,是指被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征在各自技术方案中所达到的技术效果基本相当。被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征相比还有其他技术效果的,不予考虑。

49. Being envisaged without making inventive effort refers to that a person with ordinary skills in the art can easily envisage that the technical features of the accused technical solution and the corresponding technical features in the claim are mutually replaceable. The following factors shall be taken into account when making a judgment: whether the two technical features belong to the same or close technical categories; whether the two technical features follow the same working principles; whether the two technical features are mutually replaceable directly in a simple manner, that is, whether other parts need to be redesigned for the sake of the replacement between the two technical features, wherein simple adjustment of size and interface position shall not be regarded as a redesign.

49无需经过创造性劳动就能够想到,是指对于本领域普通技术人员而言,被诉侵权技术方案中的技术特征与权利要求对应技术特征相互替换是容易想到的。在具体判断时可考虑以下因素:两技术特征是否属于同一或相近的技术类别;两技术特征所利用的工作原理是否相同;两技术特征之间是否存在简单的直接替换关系,即两技术特征之间的替换是否需对其他部分作出重新设计,但简单的尺寸和接口位置的调整不属于重新设计。

50. In the determination of whether equivalent infringement is found, the court shall make a judgment in respect of means, function, effect, and whether inventive effort is required successively, wherein the judgment in respect of means, function and effect plays a primary role.

50在判定是否构成等同侵权时,对手段、功能、效果以及是否需要创造性劳动应当依次进行判断,但手段、功能、效果的判断起主要作用。

51. Replacement of equivalent features shall be replacement between specific and corresponding technical features instead of replacement between the entire technical solutions.

51等同特征的替换应当是具体的、对应的技术特征之间的替换,而不是完整技术方案之间的替换。

52. As for equivalent feature, it may be several technical features in the claim corresponding to one technical feature in the accused technical solution, or one technical feature in the claim corresponding to a combination of several technical features in the accused technical solution.

52等同特征,可以是权利要求中的若干技术特征对应于被诉侵权技术方案中的一个技术特征,也可以是权利要求中的一个技术特征对应于被诉侵权技术方案中的若干技术特征的组合。

53. Replacement of equivalent features includes both replacement of distinguishing technical features in the claim and replacement of technical features in the preamble portion of the claim.

53等同特征替换,既包括对权利要求中区别技术特征的替换,也包括对权利要求前序部分中的技术特征的替换。

54. The time point for determining whether the technical features of the accused technical solution are equivalent to those of the claim shall be subject to the time when the accused act takes place.

54判定被诉侵权技术方案的技术特征与权利要求的技术特征是否等同的时间点,应当以被诉侵权行为发生时为界限。

55. Where there are more than one equivalent features between the claim and the accused technical solution, if the aggregation of the more than one equivalent features enables the accused technical solution to form a technical solution which has the technical concept different from that of the claim, or to achieve unexpected technical effects, it shall generally not be determined that equivalent infringement is found.

55权利要求与被诉侵权技术方案存在多个等同特征,如果该多个等同特征的叠加导致被诉侵权技术方案形成了与权利要求技术构思不同的技术方案,或者被诉侵权技术方案取得了预料不到的技术效果的,则一般不宜认定构成等同侵权。

56. In respect of a claim comprising functional features, compared with the structural and step features as prescribed in Article 19 of the Guidelines, where the corresponding structural and step features of the accused technical solution achieve the same function and generate the same effect by substantially the same means, which can be envisaged by a person with ordinary skills in the art during the period from the filing date of the patent in suit till the date when the accused act takes place without making inventive effort, it shall be determined that the corresponding structural and step features are equivalent to the functional features.

56对于包含功能性特征的权利要求,与本指南第19条所述的结构、步骤特征相比,被诉侵权技术方案的相应结构、步骤特征是以基本相同的手段,实现相同的功能,达到相同的效果,且本领域普通技术人员在涉案专利申请日后至被诉侵权行为发生时无需经过创造性劳动就能够联想到的,应当认定该相应结构、步骤特征与功能性特征等同。

 

 

undefined

undefined