Xu Wenqing v. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences of the State Intellectual Property Office, and Xing Pengwan
China Supreme People’s Court
Judgment No. Minsantizi 2/2005 (2005)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Xu Wenqing (plaintiff) secured a patent for a method of preventing corrosion on the interior and exterior walls of steel tube bundles. Xing Pengwan (defendant) filed a request for China’s State Intellectual Property Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) (defendant) to declare the patent invalid. Xing’s primary contention was that the patent’s claims were not supported by the patent’s description. More particularly, Claim 1 of the patent referred to the liquid anticorrosion treatment of interior and exterior walls as a single method, unlike the description, which referred to separate methods for the interior and exterior walls. The BPAI declared the patent invalid, but without affording Xu the opportunity to make a statement of relevant grounds and facts. Xu brought suit in the Beijing Higher People’s Court, which ruled in favor of the BPAI and Xing. Xu then appealed to the China Supreme People’s Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wang, He, Li, J.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
