13910160652
010-52852558
Home > Focus on Cases > Annual Selection > Patent

Top 10 Patent Reexamination Invalidation Cases of 2021

Post Time:2022-05-12 Source:IP Today Author: Views:
font-size:

On April 26, 2022, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) announced the Top 10 Patent Reexamination Invalidation Cases Released in 2021.  Invalidation cases cover utility models, invention patents, designs and layout designs of integrated circuits.


Novel sulfamides and their use as endothelin receptor antagonists


Substituted polycyclic carbamoyl pyridone derivative prodrug


Data transmission method and system for obtaining network connection through image acquisition


Left atrial appendage occluder


Axial flow fan


Image Sensor CS3825C


Instrument case


Explosion-proof device


Quinoline Derivatives for the Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis


Articulating Joint for Plumbing



Report in English:


1.Invalidation of the invention patent titled Novel sulfamides and their use as endothelin receptor antagonists


Patent number:


ZL01820481.3


Patentee: 


Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd


Petitioner: 


Nanjing Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


valid on the basis of amendment


This case is a model case for the invalidation of drug compounds and serves as an exemplary case for determining sufficient disclosure in priority documents and inventiveness.


2.Invalidation of invention patent titled Substituted polycyclic carbamoyl pyridone derivative prodrug


Patent number: 


ZL201180056716.8


Patentee: 


Shionogi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.


Petitioner:


Liu Yitong


Trial conclusion: 


valid


This case has reference significance for accurately evaluating the technical effect described in the specification and whether the Markush claim can be supported by the specification.


3.Invalidation of invention patent titled Data transmission method and system for obtaining network connection through image acquisition


Patent number: 


ZL201010523284.4


Patentee: 


Shanghai Kedou Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.


Petitioner: 


Palm Reading Technology Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


invalid


This case has interpreted the legal provision that the parties’ withdrawal of their claims is not subject to termination of trial procedures, so as to reasonably balance the interests of the patentee and the public.


4.Invalidation of invention patent named left atrial appendage occlude


Patent number: 


ZL201310567987.0


Patentee: 


Lifetech Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.


Petitioner: 


Cai Jingli


Trial conclusion: 


invalid


This case interprets the application of the “novelty grace period” and decides to emphasize that the patentee should perform the necessary declaration obligations in a timely manner when he knows that others have disclosed his technical content without consent.


5.Invalidation of invention patent named axial flow fan


Patent number: 


ZL200710026747.4


Patentee: 


Guangdong Midea Refrigeration Equipment Co., Ltd.


Invalid petitioner: 


Zhuhai Gree Electric Appliances Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


invalid


This case involves the determination of the validity of the evidence involving a unilateral authentication report and the technical comparison of the product claims using intrinsic definitions and extrinsic public evidence.


6.The case of revocation of the exclusive right of the layout design of the integrated circuit named “Image Sensor CS3825C”


Registration number:


BS.175539928


Patentee: 


Zhuhai Siwang Semiconductor Co., Ltd.


Petitioner: 


Shenzhen Xinzhirui Optoelectronics Technology Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


valid


This case interprets the rules of judgment regarding the object of exclusive rights protection, the scope of original trial and the period of application for registration.


7.Invalidation of a design patent named instrument case


Patent number: 


ZL201030122941.5


Patentee: 


Fujian Shunchang Hongrun Precision Instrument Co., Ltd.


Invalid requester: 


Xiamen Xike Automation Technology Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


declared invalid


This case clarifies the knowledge level and cognitive ability that “general consumers” as the subject of judgment should have, and analyzes the different influence weights of various design features on the overall visual effect.


8.Invalidation of a utility model patent named explosion-proof device


Patent number: 


ZL201521112402.7


Patentee: 


Contemporary Amperex Technology Co Ltd


Petitioner: 


Dongguan Tafel New Energy Technology Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Tafel New Energy Technology Co., Ltd.


Trial conclusion: 


valid after amendment


This case is a typical case of inventiveness of structural products in the field of new energy. 


The decision emphasizes that the determination of existence of technical enlightenment should be based on the relationship between the distinguishing features.


9.Invalidation of an invention patent titled Quinoline Derivatives for the Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis


Patent number: 


ZL201210507318.X


Patentee: 


Janssen Pharmaceutica NV


Petitioner: 


Wang Liqun


Trial conclusion: 


valid after amendment


This case clarifies whether there is a “reasonable expectation of success” in determining the inventiveness of an invention for medical use.


10.Invalidation of a utility model patent titled Articulating Joint for Plumbing


Patent number: 


ZL201920390483.9


Patentee: 


Zhejiang Tianyan Holdings Co., Ltd.


Petitioner: 


Meng Xianglin


Trial conclusion: 


valid


This case clarifies the allocation of the burden of proof and access to domestic priority documents when verifying the priority of evidence.

    Related articles

    This article has no related articles!