Advanced Search

Shandong Provincial Patent Disputes And Conciliation

Original Language Title: 山东省专利纠纷处理和调解办法

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.

Chapter I General

Article 1, in order to regulate the handling and mediation of patent disputes and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, establishes this approach in line with the laws, regulations, such as the patent law of the People's Republic of China, the application of the Patent Act of the People's Republic of China.

Article 2 deals with and mediation in patent disputes within the territorial administration and applies this approach.

Article 3. The patent administration of the government of the communes of the province and the establishment area, at the request of the parties, deals with and facilitates the handling of patent disputes in the present administration.

The Patent Administration of the People's Government (markets, zones) is entrusted by the Government's patent administration in the provinces and the districts, which can deal with and conciliate patent disputes within the present administration.

Article IV requires the parties to deal with or mediate patent disputes, subject to the jurisdiction of the patent administration in the place of abuse or at the location of the requested person.

The parties submit requests for treatment to more than two competent patent administrations, which are governed by the first-served patent administration.

The patent administration disputed the jurisdiction and was appointed by the provocative government patent administration, jointly by the parties.

Article 5 is one of the following cases in which a patent dispute is dealt with and mediation by the Government of the province's patent administration:

(i) The parties are foreigners, stateless persons, foreign enterprises and organizations;

(ii) The location of the requested person is not the city of the same province;

(iii) Significant, complex or significant impacts.

In the case of the first paragraph, the Government of the Provincial People's Patent Administration may designate the Government's patent administration in the area concerned.

Article 6 deals with patent disputes by the patent administration and should be based on fact-finding and legal quasi-organism and be guided by fair and timely principles.

The patent administration mediation of patent disputes should be guided by voluntary, legitimate principles and, on the basis of facts, promote mutual understanding among parties and reach conciliation agreements.

Article 7. The patent administration is inadmissible for a patent dispute that has been taken to deal with a decision or to enter into a conciliation agreement, in the same facts and reasons, for which the patent administration is requested once again.

Chapter II Treatment of patent disputes

Article 8, without a patent owner's licence, triggers a patent infringement dispute, and a patent owner or an owner may file a request for a patent infringement dispute with the patent administration.

Article 9. The request for a patent dispute settlement shall be in accordance with the following conditions:

(i) A clear requester;

(ii) Clear requests and specific facts, reasons;

(iii) The scope of the patent administration;

(iv) The parties did not sue the People's Court for the dispute.

Article 10. The parties shall submit the following materials to the extent that they request dealing with the patent dispute:

(i) Request;

(ii) Evidence of the subjectivity of the party;

(iii) Effective evidence of the relevant patent documents and patent rights;

(iv) Evidence suspected of violating patent rights;

(v) Other relevant evidence, proof.

The parties should provide the original, raw or checked with the patent administration the unlike reproduction, photographs, copies, and videos; the submission of external material should be accompanied by Chinese translations.

Article 11. The parties entrust the agent and shall submit a letter of authorization entrusted by the author's signature or chapter. Authorizations should contain matters and competences.

The agents should be given special authorization to the commissioner in recognition, abandonment, change of requests or reconciliation.

Article 12. The patent administration reviews the request and the related materials and considers that it is in accordance with the conditions of the case, which shall be filed within five working days from the date of receipt of the request and shall inform the parties that the author's written notice shall be inadmissible within five working days from the date of receipt of the request and shall justify the reasons.

The request and the related material will need to be added and the patent administration shall notify the requesting person within five working days of the date of receipt of the request and the related material to be added within the specified period. The patent administration should be required to file within five working days from the date of receipt of the supplementary material; the applicant's late non-renewable or non-requirement, in writing, to inform the requesting person inadmissible and justified the reasons.

Article 13 deals with patent disputes by the patent administration and can investigate the relevant evidence in accordance with its mandate.

The parties cannot collect the relevant evidence on their own account for objective reasons, and may request the patent administration to investigate the evidence in writing, and the patent administration decides, on the basis of the circumstances, to investigate the collection of the evidence.

When the patent administration investigates the evidence, the parties and the persons concerned should assist in collaboration, if any, by denying, blocking or concealing, forfeiture, transfer and destruction of evidence.

Article 14. In dealing with patent disputes, the patent administration shall require the parties to present evidence and to carry out the evidence.

Evidence concerning commercial secrets and personal privacy may be submitted by the parties for non-public evidence.

Article 15 refers to the professional nature of the patent dispute and may make an application for accreditation to the patent administration. The patent administration considers it necessary to determine, in consultation with the parties, the validity of the consultation and designation by the patent administration.

The patent administration may hire experts or institutions to advise on professional issues related to patent disputes.

Article 16 shall send requests and other relevant materials within five working days of the date of the submission of the case to the requesting person, requesting that they submit their responses within 15 days of the date of receipt. The late submission of the requested person does not affect the treatment of the patent administration.

The patent administration should send the respondent within five working days from the date of receipt of the reply.

Article 17, when a patent administration handles a patent dispute, may decide whether to conduct an oral hearing on the merits.

An oral hearing should be communicated to the parties at least by the time and place of the three work before the oral trial. The requesting party has no justification for refusing to participate, or has not been allowed to withdraw, and the applicant is treated in the absence of the request in accordance with the request for withdrawal.

One of the following cases may be extended:

(i) The parties and other participants at the site must be justified;

(ii) Interim submission by the parties of a waiver request;

(iii) The need to inform new witnesses to the sites, to draw new evidence, to re-establish, investigate or to require additional investigations;

(iv) Other circumstances that may be extended by law, legislation and regulations.

After a patent administration case, it was considered that additional units or individuals would be required to participate in the treatment of a patent dispute and that the relevant units or individuals should be notified in writing.

In one of the following cases, the suspension of the treatment of a patent dispute was suspended:

(i) The death of one party and the need to wait the successor to indicate whether the dispute is involved;

(ii) The loss of the ability of the party to act and the absence of a statutory agent;

(iii) The termination of a legal person or other organization as a party, which has not yet been determined to be subject to the rights obligations;

(iv) The parties of one party cannot participate in the handling of the dispute because of their irrevocability;

(v) The present case should be based on the outcome of other cases, and other cases have not been completed;

(vi) Other circumstances that should be suspended by law, legislation and regulations.

The reasons for the suspension should be restored in a timely manner.

Article 21, in one of the following cases, revocation of a patent dispute:

(i) The case was found to be not governed by the patent administration;

(ii) In the course of the process, the conditions of admissibility are found;

(iii) Laws, regulations stipulate that cases should be removed.

Article 22 states that:

(i) To request the death of a successor or a successor to abandon the request;

(ii) The death of the person requested and the absence of an obligation;

(iii) The termination of a legal person or other organization as a party, without a right to bear the human person;

(iv) The requestor shall be withdrawn or considered to withdraw the request;

(v) The right to patent in question was declared invalid;

(vi) The parties' agreement on mediation;

(vii) Other circumstances that should be closed by law, legislation and regulations.

Article 23 deals with patent disputes by the patent administration, which may be conciliationd; mediation is incomplete and decisions should be taken in a timely manner.

Article 24 deals with patent disputes by the patent administration and should be closed within three months from the date of the submission. The particular complexity of the case requires the extension period, which should be approved by the patent executive head, with an extension period not exceeding one month.

The following period shall not be taken into account for the duration of the cases specified in the preceding paragraph:

(i) The period of notice, identification;

(ii) Suspension of the period of treatment to recovery;

(iii) Period of jurisdiction dispute resolution;

(iv) The period of mediation by both parties;

(v) Period during which new evidence is obtained and re-examined.

Article 25. The patent administration deals with the infringement of a patent and determines the existence of a violation, and should take a decision to deal with an immediate cessation of the violation by the law; and determines that the violation is not established and should reject the request.

Chapter III Conciliation of patent disputes

Article 26 The patent administration may, upon request by the parties, communicate the following patent disputes:

(i) Disputes that do not pay appropriate expenses after the patent inventing the patent application is published;

(ii) The right to apply for patents and the right to belong to the patent;

(iii) Inventors, designers' eligibility disputes;

(iv) Inventors, designers and pay disputes created by job inventing;

(v) Other patent disputes under law, regulations.

The patent administration may also, at the request of the parties, communicate the amount of compensation that violates the patent rights.

In the case of the first dispute, the parties requested the mediation of the patent administration, which should be made after the patent was granted.

Article 27 requests the patent administration to mediate the patent disputes and submit written requests and related evidence.

A separate request for mediation for damages against patent rights should be submitted to the decision of the patent administration to determine violations.

Article 28 should send the request to the requested person within five working days of the date of receipt of the request for mediation, requesting that it submit its submissions within 15 days of the date of receipt, indicating whether mediation is agreed; the requested person's late submission shall be considered to be inconsistency with mediation.

Article 29 was submitted by the requested person and agreed with mediation, and the patent administration should inform the parties in writing of the manner, time and place of mediation within five working days from the date of receipt of the submissions.

The applicant's late submission of a statement of opinion or the expression of non-conception of mediation in the presentation of the opinion, and the patent administration should inform the requesting person in a timely manner.

Article 33, which was agreed upon by the parties through mediation, produced a conciliation agreement by the patent administration and signed by the parties in the letter of agreement or chapter. The parties consider it necessary to apply to the People's Court by law for judicial recognition.

Chapter IV During the exhibition and processing of patents in electronic commerce

During the various economic technical trade exhibitions, exhibitions, fairs, trade fairs and exhibitions organized within the territorial administration of this province, the patent owner or the owner submitted a request for the treatment of a patent dispute to the patent administration at the location of the exhibition, the patent administration shall decide on the admissibility within twenty-four hours after receipt of the request for processing of a patent dispute and inform the requesting, the requested and the host party.

Article 32 allows the patent administration to receive requests for treatment of patent disputes and may require the respondent of the requested person within the specified period. The applicant's late failure to respond does not affect the treatment of the case by the patent administration.

In one of the following cases, the patent administration is inadmissible:

(i) The requesting person has submitted a request for treatment to the patent administration or has brought proceedings before the People's Court;

(ii) The right to patent is in an invalid declaration of the process of processing;

(iii) The right to patent exists as a matter of rights, in the proceedings before the People's Court or in the conciliation procedure of the patent administration.

Article 34 quarant administration has been reviewed to determine the existence of a patent infringement and should be responsible for the withdrawal of the applicant from the exhibitions of the violation of the right to patent, the destruction or seizure of the related information material; whether the creation of a patent infringe cannot be determined and should be communicated to the parties and to remain seized after the closure of the exhibition.

Article 335, in which the patent administration determines the existence and decision-making of a patent infringement on the e-commerce platform, should inform the provider of the e-commerce platform to adopt measures such as deletion, vetting or sequencing of the relevant web pages of patented infringers.

Chapter V Legal responsibility

Article 36, in violation of this approach, provides that the provisions of the law, legislation and regulations have been applied.

Article 337 The patent administration and its staff are not mandated by law to deal with and concilitate patent disputes, which are being modified by an order of responsibility of the superior patent administration; in the case of serious circumstances, the competent and other direct responsible persons directly responsible are treated in accordance with the law.

Patent executive staff play a role in dealing with and mediation of patent disputes, abuse of authority, provocative fraud, and are lawfully punished by law; compensation is provided to citizens, legal persons and other organizations in accordance with the law; and criminal liability in accordance with the law.

In violation of this approach, the patent administration imposes a fine of more than three million yen on the parties concerned to conceal, forfeiture, transfer, destruction and case-related evidence.

In violation of this approach, the party found guilty of a violation of the patent during the exhibition refused to withdraw from the exhibition to identify the infringements, destroying or envelope the related information material and imposing a fine of up to three million yen by the patent administration.

In violation of this approach, the provider of the e-commerce platform rejects measures such as deletion, vetting or disclosing links to the patented product-related web page, with a fine of more than three million dollars for the patent administration.

Annex VI

Article 40 This approach was implemented effective 1 May 2009. The Pattern Dispute Settlement in the Province of San Orientale Province (No.