Judicial Enforcement of China’s
New Patent Law:
Doctrine of Equivalent
Prof. Zhang Naigen
Fudan University
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
1
Fudan IP Project
• Fudan IP Center conducted the project on
judicial enforcement of China’s new patent
law since its entry into force in 2009 and until
2012. It has researched 2556 settled cases by
the courts of Shanghai, Beijing, Jiangsu,
Zhejiang and Guangdong as well as the
Supreme Court, including 453 judgments to
apply new laws and judicial interpretation.
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
2
The Publication of Project is coming
• Co-editors: Zhang Naigen and Zhu Dan (Chief
Judge of Shanghai Higher People’s Court, IP
Tribunal) by Shanghai Jiaotong Uni. Press
• Study on Judicial Enforcement of China’s New
Patent Law
• More information is available at Fudan IP web
http://www.ipcenter.fudan.edu.cn/
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
3
Shanghai as an example:
patent cases applying the new law
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
4
Doctrine of Equivalent:
Analysis of Two Cases
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
5
Case I
• Ningbo Yuexiang Machine Manufactory v.
Shanghai Yongyi Machine Manufactory
• 宁波悦祥机械制造有限公司诉上海昶意机
械制造有限公司侵害发明专利权纠纷案
• (2012) Shanghai Higher Court IP Final No. 10
沪高民三(知)终字第10号
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
6
First instance
• (2011) Shanghai 2nd Intermediate People’s Courts’
judgment IP No. 106
• (2011)沪二中民五(知)初字第106号
• Under Art. 59 of new patent law to determine
infringement of patent for invention and utility model,
which remains unchanged since 1984, and Art 17 of
2001 judicial interpretation on Doctrine of Equivalents
(triple E of means/function and results) , Art. 7 of 2010
judicial interpretation, the Court ruled that the
technical character 4’ of accused product was
equivalent of that one of the claim 1.
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
7
The Final Ruling of Appellate Court
• Shanghai Higher People’s Court
• (2012) Shanghai Higher Court IP Final No. 10
• (2012) 沪高民三(知)终字第10号
• The final ruling reversed the judgment of the first
instance.
• The Art. 17 of 2001 interpretation shall be applicable,
but Art. 7 of 2010 interpretation shall be more
preferred.
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
8
Legal Reasoning
• The facts are unchallenged.
• But, legal reasoning is different.
• The Higher Court emphasized that “the technical
character 4’ of accused product is the spring-block by
push of air pressure, and the claimed technical character
4 of patented product is the spring-block by push of
mechanical moving , which are not equivalents ” .
• One element is missed. No equivalent.
• The stricter application of Doctrine of Equivalents
is preferred under art.7 of 2010 interpretation.
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
9
Chinese for your reference
本院认为，经比对，首先，被控侵权产品的技术特征4'气弹簧的结构与涉
案专利权利要求1中技术特征4的具体实施方式A1、A4不相同。其次，涉案
专利权利要求1中技术特征4的具体实施方式A1、A4采用的是机械弹簧式的
锁定装置，通过拉动插销拉手体而使插销插入或者抽出插销孔从而使伸缩
杆在伸缩杆套管中的轴向滑动来实现‘控制前车架和后车架间夹角变化’；
被控侵权产品采用的是气弹簧式的锁定装置，通过开启、关闭控制阀门来
控制气缸桶内的压力平衡从而使活塞杆在气缸桶中的轴向滑动来实现‘控
制前车架和后车架间夹角变化’。技术特征4'使用的气弹簧与技术特征4的
具体实施方式A1、A4的工作原理不相同，两者的技术手段并不相同，也非
基本相同。由于技术特征4'与技术特征4两者使用的手段并不基本相同，因
此，被控侵权产品的技术特征4'与涉案发明专利权利要求1的技术特征4既
不相同，也不等同。
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
10
General Observation
• In practice, it has been customary to apply
both Art. 7 of 2010 interpretation (element by
element) and Art. 17 of 2001 interpretation
(triple equivalents of means/function/results).
• The case I is a good example.
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
11
Case II
• Jiangsu Provisional Higher People’s Court:
Hubeier Co., Ltd v. Chanzhou Wujingfen
Communication Equipment Co., Ltd
• 胡贝尔和茹纳股份公司诉常州市武进风市
通信设备有限公司侵犯发明专利权纠纷案
• (2012) Jiangsu Higher Court IP No.0021
苏知民终字第0021号
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
12
Patent Product and Accused Product
Circulated block
Spring block
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
13
Jiangsu Higher Court’s Opinion
• The technical characters of patent claim 1 shall be
regarded as a whole to play the function of blockpressure, therefore it shall not be separated to
compare all necessary technical characters with the
accused product one by one. No equivalent.
• 由于涉案专利权利要求1的紧固套设置技术特征内容中所
有的必需技术特征是作为一个整体来实现卡锁—压紧这一
独立功能的，因此在进行等同比对时，不应将实现该功能
的所有必需技术特征再进行分解，而是应当将紧固套设置
技术特征的内容作为一个总的技术特征与被控侵权产品的
相应实施方式进行整体比对。不构成侵权。
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
14
Different Legal Reasoning
• Same conclusions and legal bases
The new law (Art. 59.1), the both interpretations of 2010 (Art.
7)and 2001 (Art.17).
• Different legal reasoning
Case I: element by element
Case II: as a whole
• Doctrine of equivalents: died in China as in US ?
• Shall we have a CAFC-style national patent court in
China to harmonize jurisprudence of patent litigation ?
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
15
Thank for your attention
Putting a Protective Shield Around your IP
16