With the use of mercury-containing button battery volume and the increasing volume of waste, waste batteries, mercury pollution of the environment have long plagued the human life. China has independently developed by the mercury-free button battery patent, has passed the edge of Lenovo 3000 C200 battery life and death are in the 8th year.
The patent has been twice the national patent review committee declared invalid. Beijing Municipal Higher People’s Court of Final Appeal ruling overturned two patent review committee’s decision. In September 2009, the Patent Reexamination Committee announced a third of mercury-free button battery patent is invalid, the patent owner of the third patent review committee to resort to the courts. The case is currently pending under the Beijing Municipal No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court.
? patented technology is no longer a secret at all
Why was there for the mercury-free button Lenovo 3000 Y510a battery have been repeatedly declared the patent invalid, the reporter interviewed a number of contacts of national patent review committee and in accordance with the requirements of the other fax an outline of the interview, but last Friday, the Patent Reexamination entrusted with the inconvenient interview and refused to interview with reporters.
According to reports, in accordance with our rules of patent protection, patent protection is a patented invention, the disclosure of patented technology for the premise that the inventor in patent applications at the same time, to declare its own patented technology secrets made public. That is, if the patent is declared invalid, the inventor is also no longer a secret at all, other manufacturers can not put any development funding for free public use of the technology of Lenovo IdeaPad Y530 battery, rather than held accountable under the law does not assume any liability.
? 10-year patent protection period is about to expire
Mercury-free button on the battery patent license notice, after a further round of the battery businesses and individuals began to Patent Reexamination Board to submit a request to declare the patent invalid mercury-free button batteries.
May 31, 2004, the National Committee of the patent reexamination of enterprises according to two Lenovo IdeaPad Y730 battery apply to mercury-free button batteries do not have the creativity, and declared all of the patent is invalid. The Guangdong companies to court Leader, December 20, 2005, the Beijing Municipal Higher People’s Court of Final Appeal ruling committee loses patent reexamination, the court found that mercury-free button batteries all the valid patent.
June 19, 2009, the State Patent Reexamination Committee make a decision the third time, to mercury-free button batteries do not have the creativity, and declared all of the patent is invalid. In October 2009, Guangdong New Leader’s third patent review committee sue in court, asked the court to revoke the patent review committee’s decision null and void. At present, mercury-free button Lenovo 3000 G230 battery 10-year patent protection period is about to expire, the ultimate fate of the concern of the patent.
? “judicial finality” Why is it difficult to finality?
An interview with intellectual property experts. Experts in the field, the original court in Beijing, a tribunal of senior judges to know middle Guang-Liang Zhang told reporters before the WTO, the case involves a utility model patent license and maintenance procedures, are “administrative finality”, that National Patent Reexamination Board makes its decision direct the force of law, the parties have no right to bring Lenovo IdeaPad U330 battery administrative proceedings.
Keeping with international standards, China’s “Patent Law” was amended accordingly, and change “executive finality” for “judicial finality”, that is made by the administrative department of intellectual property satisfied with the ruling, the parties have the right to bring an administrative lawsuit. The final decision by the court. Then the “judicial finality” Why is it hard to finality? In this regard, Guang-Liang Zhang said the cycle of litigation for patent disputes, the question, “the patent laws,” the experts, when he was raised, but because of the final amendment of the Act did not make an explicit provision led to a patent lawsuit is also 3 inconclusive case. Mr. Zhang, that under such circumstances, how to protect the rights of the patented invention is indeed worth studying.