<tt id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"></pre></pre></tt>
          <nav id="6hsgl"><th id="6hsgl"></th></nav>
          国产免费网站看v片元遮挡,一亚洲一区二区中文字幕,波多野结衣一区二区免费视频,天天色综网,久久综合给合久久狠狠狠,男人的天堂av一二三区,午夜福利看片在线观看,亚洲中文字幕在线无码一区二区
          Make me your Homepage
          left corner left corner
          China Daily Website

          New patent law amendment codifies some IP protections

          Updated: 2009-12-07 07:53
          (China Daily)

          New patent law amendment codifies some IP protections

          In many countries, patent laws provide a research exemption or "safe harbor" exemption as an exception to the exclusive rights conferred by patents, which is especially relevant to drugs.

          According to this exemption, despite the patent rights, performing research and tests for regulatory approval, for instance, does not constitute infringement before the end of the patent term.

          In the United States, this exemption, known as the Hatch-Waxman exemption, is codified in 35 USC 271(e)(1).

          China's patent law does not expressly exempt activities related to regulatory review from patent infringement. Such an exemption currently exists as a judicial interpretation of the broad experimental use exception provided in the patent law.

          The Beijing Intermediate People's Court also recognized such on exemption in its non-infringement findings.

          A new amendment to China's patent law codifies the judicial interpretation and practice by stating that it is not an act of infringement if a patented drug or medical apparatus is manufactured, used or imported solely for the purposes of obtaining and providing information for administrative approval.

          While the amendment, which was approved this year, formalizes the exemption for activities related to regulatory review (the so-called "naked" Bolar exemption), it does not provide any provision for patent linkage with marketing approval.

          In addition, China does not afford patent term extension or patent term restoration to compensate for regulatory delays in obtaining State Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of drugs.

          Although some form of patent linkage has already been prescribed in the Pharmaceutical Registration Regulation, and the Chinese FDA has a set of procedures for implementing such patent linkage, it is essentially a toothless linkage plan.

          This is because under this procedure, it is not an act of infringement to seek marketing approval. As such, it is of limited value.

          Patent exhaustion

          The current patent law in Article 63 provides for domestic patent exhaustion, which applies to a product sold by the patentee in China.

          However, the language of Article 63 is not clear with respect to the importation into China of a product sold by the patentee outside China.

          The amendment clearly provides for both domestic and international exhaustion of patent rights.

          Under the amendment, it is not patent infringement when "anyone uses, offers to sell, sells or imports a patented product or a product directly obtained from a patented process, which has been sold by the patentee or by an entity or individual authorized by the patentee".

          The addition of "imports" makes it clear that the parallel importation of patented products is not considered patent infringement in China.

          The language of the amended statute does not make a distinction between restricted sales and unrestricted sales.

          Therefore, it is not clear whether international patent exhaustion can be prevented by contractual restrictions on the products sold.

          Moreover, international exhaustion, contractual restrictions and antitrust issues interact in complex ways, and companies need to carefully structure their relationships in different jurisdictions to best achieve their business and commercial goals.

          Preliminary injunctions

          Article 61 of the current patent law authorizes courts to issue injunctions before filing an infringement suit, which might be translated as China's efforts to implement its obligations to provide preliminary injunctive relief in patent infringement cases. In China, this is referred to as "pre-suit injunction".

          Judicial Interpretations on "Application of Laws in Trials of Patent Related Lawsuits" issued in 2001 by the Chinese Supreme People's Court provides some procedural guidelines.

          Upon receiving a request for a preliminary injunction, a court must make a ruling within 48 hours if it finds that all procedural requirements have been properly met.

          The 48-hour time limit can be extended in special circumstances. Once issued, the injunction is immediately enforceable.

          The patentee must then initiate an infringement action in the courts within 15 days of issuance of the injunction, or the injunction will be lifted automatically.

          Either party can request the issuing court to reconsider its decision, which is an administrative procedure within the court.

          However, the injunction will remain enforceable during reconsideration and any subsequent proceedings until final judgment.

          The new amendment incorporates the above procedures and further clarifies that the posting of a bond for a preliminary injunction motion is required. If no bond is posted, the motion will be denied.

          Moreover, the petitioner is responsible for any loss sustained by the respondent if the petitioner makes a mistake in the motion for preliminary injunction.

          Notwithstanding the codification of preliminary injunction, obtaining a preliminary injunction in most patent infringement cases in China has always been and is becoming increasingly more difficult.

          Both infringement and irreparable harm must be clearly proven-a burden that is not easy to meet in China, given the country's stringent evidentiary requirements and the lack of traditional discovery procedures.

          Moreover, the Supreme People's Court a few years ago tempered any early enthusiasm for the issuance of such injunctions by issuing an instruction to the lower courts urging caution in issuing preliminary injunctions. The court noted that preliminary injunctions should not be issued in cases involving non-literal infringement or complicated technologies.

          Statistically, most plaintiffs in patent infringement cases do not seek a preliminary injunction for these reasons.

          For those who do request a preliminary injunction, the success rate is relatively high (i.e., greater than 50 percent). It is yet to be seen if the statistics will change after the effective date of the amendment.

          The authors are lawyers for the US law firm Jones Day. The opinions expressed are their own

          Editor's note: The IPR Special is sponsored by the State Intellectual Property Office and published by China Business Weekly. To contact the Intellectual Property Office, the IPR Special hotlines are 8610-64995419 or 8610-64995826, and the e-mail address is ipr@chinadaily.com.cn.

          (China Daily 12/05/2009 page9)

           
          ...
          Hot Topics
          Geng Jiasheng, 54, a national master technician in the manufacturing industry, is busy working on improvements for a new removable environmental protection toilet, a project he has been devoted to since last year.
          ...
          ...
          主站蜘蛛池模板: 亚洲色无码播放亚洲成av| 中文字幕无码免费久久99| 国产成人精彩在线视频50| 日韩激情无码av一区二区| 国产av最新一区二区| 久久久噜噜噜久久中文福利 | 69成人免费视频无码专区| 久久久久久久久久久久中文字幕| 日韩大片看一区二区三区| 成人网站在线进入爽爽爽| 强制高潮18xxxxhd日韩| 国产精品亚洲欧美大片在线看| 国产精品视频网国产| 狠狠婷婷色五月中文字幕| 久久精品一偷一偷国产| 国精产品一二二线网站| 无码a∨高潮抽搐流白浆| 真实国产老熟女无套中出| 久久精品国产91精品亚洲| 精品亚洲AⅤ无码午夜在线| 国产一区二区黄色激情片| 亚洲综合在线日韩av| 亚洲国产欧美在线观看片| 精品 日韩 国产 欧美 视频 | 亚洲欧美日韩综合久久| 苍井空无码丰满尖叫高潮| 亚洲区欧美区综合区自拍区| 国产偷窥熟女高潮精品视频| 中文字幕国产精品日韩| 亚洲欧美日韩在线码| 最新偷拍一区二区三区| 性欧美暴力猛交69hd| 成人a免费α片在线视频网站| 国产欧美精品一区aⅴ影院| 男人扒女人添高潮视频| 国产美女午夜福利视频| 亚洲色欲在线播放一区| 国产精品福利自产拍久久| 国产农村激情免费专区| 大胸美女吃奶爽死视频| 伊人久久大香线蕉av网|