iPhone6 ​​series was sentenced to appearance infringement ordered to stop selling Apple questioning property rights bureau

In the morning, the trial of the parties to debate whether the iPhone6 ​​series infringes the domestic mobile phone design patent is the focus

Previously, the Beijing Intellectual Property Office found that the design of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus phones infringed the patent rights of the company and ordered them to stop selling. Apple Computer Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (abbreviated as Apple) and Beijing Zhongfu Telecommunications Equipment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Zhongfu Company) refused to accept an administrative lawsuit against the Beijing Intellectual Property Court.

▲Before the trial, the plaintiff’s lawyer showed the reporter the appearance of the patent in question/photographer Cao Boyuan

This morning, the case was heard in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. During the trial, the parties debated the focus of the dispute.

The appearance of the incident allegedly infringed the patent iPhone6 ​​series was ordered to stop selling

佰利公司 is the design patent holder of the mobile phone 100c. Previously, the design of the iPhone6 ​​and iPhone6 ​​Plus, which were promised to be sold and sold by the subsidiary of Zhongfu Company, infringed on the patent right and proposed to the Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Office. The request is required to order the respondent to stop the above promised sales and sales activities.

The Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Office conducted a trial in accordance with the “Administrative Enforcement Measures for Patents” and added Apple as the co-respondent of the case.

On May 10 this year, the Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Office made a “Decision on the Handling of Patent Infringement Disputes”, ordering Apple to stop selling, and Zhongfu Company stopped selling and selling the alleged infringing products.

Both Apple and Zhongfu were dissatisfied, filed an administrative lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, demanded that the court cancel the decision of the lawsuit, and declared that the two mobile phones, the iPhone6 ​​and iPhone6 ​​Plus, were not covered by the patent rights covered by the case.

The collegial panel of five people in the trial heard many media attendants

In the morning, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court heard the case of Apple Inc. v. Beijing Intellectual Property Office. The case was judged by the president of the Intellectual Property Court, the judge and the people's juror, Cui Guobin, a teacher of Tsinghua University, and Yao Huanqing, a teacher of Renmin University. Beijing Zhongfu Telecom Mall and Shenzhen Kenli Company participated in the lawsuit as a third party. The case attracted many media to come and listen.

During the trial, the collegial panel conducted a trial around the eight major issues of the dispute, and the parties fully expressed their opinions.

As of press time, the case is still pending.

Main debate focus 1. Is the decision process made by Beijing Intellectual Property Bureau illegal?

In the court, the Intellectual Property Office stated that the Bureau made the decision of the case in accordance with the provisions of Article 60 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China. The decision was legal and the facts were correct.

Apple believes that when the company made a request to the Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Office and did not apply for the addition of Apple, the property office directly added it as a joint respondent, violating the corresponding legal procedures. “Apple Shanghai has no infringement in Beijing. The Beijing Intellectual Property Office, as a local institution, has no right to order us to stop selling the products involved in the country.”

At the same time, Apple believes that the property rights bureau did not give Apple the opportunity to cross-examine the case in the trial case, did not organize the two sides to conduct a full debate, deprived of their right to make statements, and did not comply with legal procedures.

Zhongfu Company stated that the company’s purchase channel is legal and sells mobile phones within its business scope. This act does not infringe the rights of either party.

2. Does the appearance of the Apple phone infringe the patent?

After comparing the mobile phones of the two parties involved, the Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Office believes that there are a series of differences between the alleged infringing products and the patents involved, but the “home” key design, the shape and layout of the side buttons, the speaker holes and headphones The five differences in the arrangement of the jacks belong to the functional design. The difference between the over-design from the front to the back is a minor difference that is difficult for the average consumer to notice. Therefore, it should be determined that the alleged infringing product has no significant difference from the patent in question. The scope of protection of the patent involved.

The Apple Company stated that there were many significant differences between the alleged infringing products and the patents involved, and the accused decided to make the facts wrong. The five distinguishing features identified by the Property Office are not functional designs, and the Property Office has not considered its differences.

For example, Apple's iPhone6 ​​and iPhone6 ​​Plus are symmetric from the front to the side of the arc. The mobile phone 100c of the company is asymmetrical. The property office thinks this is only a slight difference, but the difference has a significant visual effect.

At the same time, Apple proposed that the patentee’s claim in the patent invalidation review administrative lawsuit in another lawsuit is contrary to the relevant opinions in this case, so the court is required to revoke the decision of the case.

STF274 Series Brushless AC Alternator

STF274 Series Alternator Suppliers

1.Easy to be connected with power network or other generators. Standard 2/3 pitch windings
check excessive midline current.

2.Any permanent magnetic generators, providing invariable excitation on all occasions.
3.Balanced rotor with single or two sealed ball bearings

4.Wide range of Flange adaptor and single bearing coupling disc

5.Convenient installation and maintenance with easy access to terminals, rotating diodes and
coupling bolts

6.Meet leading standards

Brushless Dynamo,Three Phase Generator,Stamford Brushless Dynamo Generator,STF274 Series Brushless AC Alternator

FUZHOU LANDTOP CO., LTD , https://www.landtopcos.com