To strengthen intellectual property protection, improve the quality and efficiency of administrative enforcement, deter infringing activities, and foster a better business and innovation environment, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has selected ten typical cases of patent administrative protection from 2025.
1. Patent Infringement Dispute Involving a Clutch Device, Shanghai
This case involved the interpretation of "offering for sale." The ruling held that an offer to sell is not established when the only communication is a purchase request from a buyer. This provides useful guidance for similar cases.
2. Patent Infringement Dispute Involving Encoding Methods and Devices, Guangdong
This case involved a standard essential patent. The authorities carefully assessed whether the parties had followed the fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory principle during pre-litigation negotiations. Based on this assessment, the parties were guided to reach a settlement that respected both the value of the patent and market rules.
3. Patent Infringement Dispute Involving a Diabetes Drug, Shandong
This case centered on whether a specific crystalline form of a drug was manufactured or used during production. The authorities gathered evidence from multiple sources to build a complete chain of evidence, allowed the parties to fully cross-examine the evidence, and made an infringement determination based on that foundation. This approach efficiently resolved a technically complex patent dispute.
4. Series of Patent Infringement Disputes Involving Equipment for Transferring Molten Metal, Sichuan
These cases involved complex technical comparisons and factual determinations. After on-site inspection and evidence collection, with the assistance of technical investigation officers, the authorities quickly established the technical facts and issued administrative rulings within a short period. This efficient and professional process protected the legitimate rights of the patentee.
5. Utility Model Patent Infringement Dispute Involving a Brush Handle Insertion Guide Device, Anhui
This case demonstrated the efficient coordination between administrative adjudication and patent validity proceedings. Through a circuit hearing mechanism, the CNIPA issued a decision on-site maintaining the validity of the patent. The enforcement authority then quickly made a ruling based on that decision, fully illustrating the advantage of fast track administrative protection.
6. Series of Design Patent Infringement Disputes Involving a Motorcycle, Chongqing
In this case, based on evidence discovered at an exhibition, the same claimant filed handling request disputes against two companies located in different districts within Chongqing Municipality. The authorities provided coordinated guidance to both districts, ensuring uniform case handling standards and improving efficiency.
7. Series of Design Patent Infringement Disputes Involving a Phone Holder, Fujian and Other Provinces
This case involved a series of cross-regional patent infringement disputes. Relying on a cross-regional collaborative protection mechanism, authorities from four provinces worked together, collecting and fixing evidence in a unified manner and handling the cases in parallel. This approach resolved the entire series of disputes within three months.
8. Design Patent Infringement Dispute Involving a Pipe Fitting, Zhejiang
During the handling of this case, the authorities successfully connected administrative mediation with arbitration. The parties reached a settlement quickly, and the compensation agreement was confirmed through arbitration, efficiently resolving the dispute.
9. Utility Model Patent Infringement Dispute Involving a Scorpion Breeding Device, Henan
This case involved the cross regional transfer of a patent administrative ruling case. After receiving the transferred materials, the accepting authority accurately determined the infringing facts and issued an administrative ruling, promptly stopping the infringing activity and effectively reducing the patentee's enforcement costs.
10. Counterfeiting of a Utility Model Patent for a Drainage Pipe, Jiangsu and Another Province
This case involved cross provincial joint evidence collection. Authorities from two provinces conducted a joint investigation, fixed key evidence, and built a complete chain of proof. Based on this, they established the facts, completed the case quickly, and imposed administrative penalties in accordance with the law.
