天津三中院天津知識產權法庭：服務保障科技創新白皮書（2023）（92頁）.pdf

1、天津市第三中級人民法院天津知識產權法庭服務保障科技創新白皮書White Paper on Serving and EnsuringScientific and Technological Innovationby Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal ofTianjin No.3 Intermediate Peoples Court2019年4月2023年4月April 2019 April 2023前言天津市第三中級人民法院天津知識產權法庭（以下簡稱天津知產法庭）于 2018 年 6 月掛牌成立，于 2019 年 4 月 1日正式對外履職，集中管轄發生

2、在天津全市范圍內的發明專利、實用新型專利、植物新品種、集成電路布圖設計、技術秘密等技術類案件和轄區內其他知識產權案件。四年以來，天津知產法庭堅持以習近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想為指導，全面貫徹習近平總書記有關知識產權工作的重要指示批示精神，認真落實中央、市委和上級法院關于知識產權服務科技創新的部署要求，在天津市第三中級人民法院黨組堅強領導下，以“建設全國一流知識產權法庭”為目標，充分發揮跨區域集中管轄技術類案件的專業化審判優勢和保護創新的示范引領作用，認真履行司法職能、聚焦精品審判工程、創新優化工作舉措、服務科技自立自強，協同培育天津市自主創新的重要源頭和原始創新的策源地，走出了一條具有天津

3、特色的知識產權司法服務保障科技創新之路，為打造天津知識產權強市和建設創新型城市提供有力司法服務和保障?，F發布天津知識產權法庭服務保障科技創新白皮書和典型案例，向全社會匯報天津知產法庭自成立以來技術類案件審判情況和服務科技創新工作取得的成果。ForewordThe Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal of the TianjinNo.3 Intermediate Peoples Court(hereinafter referred to as theTianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal)was inaugurate

4、d in June2018 and officially commenced to perform its duties on April 1,2019,with centralized jurisdiction over technical cases such asinvention patents,utility model patents,new plant varieties,designs of layout of integrated circuits,technical secrets andother intellectual property cases within th

5、e jurisdiction ofTianjin.Over the past four years,Tianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunal has adhered to the guidance of Xi Jinpings Thought onSocialismwithChineseCharacteristicsforaNewEra,comprehensively put into practice the spirit of General SecretaryXiJinpingsimportantinstructionsandinstructionson

6、intellectual property affairs,and conscientiously implementedthe deployment requirements of the Central Committee,theMunicipal Committee and the superior courts on intellectualproperty services for scientific and technological innovation.Under the steadfast leadership of the Party Leading Group of t

7、heTianjin No.3 Intermediate Peoples Court,and with theobjective of building a first-class intellectual property tribunalin China,the Tribunal has exerted fully its advantages ofspecializingincross-regionalcentralizedjurisdictionovertechnological cases and its exemplary and leading role inprotecting

8、innovation,earnestly performed its judicial functions,focused on high-quality trial programs,innovated and optimizeditsworkinitiatives,andservedtheself-relianceandself-improvement of science and technology,collaborated withTianjin City to cultivate an important source of independentinnovation and a

9、source of original innovation,and walked out apath of serving and ensuring scientific and technologicalinnovation by intellectual property rights justice with Tianjincharacteristics,so as to safeguard and provide strong judicialservices for building a robust city of intellectual property rightsand a

10、n innovative city of Tianjin.This White Paper on Servingand Ensuring Scientific and Technological Innovation by TianjinIntellectual Property Tribunal as well as typical cases are herebyreleased to report to the general public on the trial of technicalcases and the achievements of the Tianjin Intelle

11、ctual PropertyTribunal in serving scientific and technological innovation sinceits establishment.目錄一、服務保障科技創新狀況（中文）1二、服務保障科技創新狀況（英文）22三、技術類典型案例（2022.4-2023.4）63四、歷年發布技術類典型案例（2019.4-2022.3）87Table of ContentsI.Serving and Ensuring Scientific and Technological Innovation(Chinese)1II.Serving and Ensuri

12、ng Scientific and Technological Innovation(English)22III.Typical Cases（April 2022-April 2023）63IV.Typical Cases（April 2019-March 2022）87 1 天津知識產權法庭天津知識產權法庭服務保障科技創新狀況服務保障科技創新狀況（2019.42019.42023.42023.4）天津知產法庭于成立之初集中管轄發生在天津全市范圍內的專利、植物新品種、集成電路布圖設計、技術秘密、計算機軟件、涉及馳名商標認定及壟斷糾紛的第一審知識產權民事和行政案件和轄區內其他知識產權案件。202

13、2 年 5 月管轄規定調整后，天津知產法庭集中管轄天津市全市范圍內的發明專利、實用新型專利、植物新品種、集成電路布圖設計、技術秘密、計算機軟件權屬、侵權糾紛及壟斷糾紛的第一審知識產權民事和行政案件和轄區內其他知識產權案件。四年來，法庭始終堅持立足天津、面向全國、放眼世界的工作格局，始終將各項工作置于服務創新發展大局中謀劃，公正高效審理了一大批在全市、全國，乃至具有跨國影響力的精品標桿案件，以高水準司法審判護航新時代科技自立自強。一、技術類知識產權案件審理情況一、技術類知識產權案件審理情況（一）收案情況（一）收案情況1.按年度統計：截至 2023 年 3 月 31 日，法庭共計受理技術類案件 1

14、102 件；其中，2019 年受理技術類案件 188 件（一審案件 185 件，二審案件 3 件）；2020 年受理技術類案件 269 件（均為一審案件）；2021 年受理技術類案件 407 件（一審案件 404 件，二審案件 3 件）；2022 年受理技術類案件 197 件（一審案件 196 件，二審案件 1 件）；2023 年一季 2 度受理技術類案件 41 件（一審案件 40 件，二審案件 1 件）。（詳見圖表一）（圖表一）2.按案由統計：受理技術類案件中，專利案件 684 件、計算機軟件案件 303 件、技術合同案件 73 件、技術秘密案件 17 件、涉及馳名商標認定案件 15 件、壟

15、斷糾紛案件 7 件、植物新品種權案件 2 件、集成電路布圖設計案件 1 件。受理的全部技術類案件中，民事案件 1096 件，行政案件 5 件，刑事案件 1 件。（詳見圖表二）（圖表二）3 3.按集中管轄統計：受理的全部案件中，集中管轄的專利、植物新品種、集成電路布圖設計、技術秘密、計算機軟件、涉及馳名商標認定及壟斷糾紛的第一審技術類案件共計1029 件，占比 93.37%，非集中管轄的技術類案件 73 件，占比 6.63%。（詳見圖表三）（圖表三）集中管轄的案件中，發明及實用新型專利案件 387 件、計算機軟件 303 件、外觀設計專利案件 222 件、其他專利案件 75 件、技術秘密 17

16、件、涉及馳名商標認定糾紛 15 件、壟斷糾紛 7 件、植物新品種糾紛 2 件、集成電路布圖設計 1件。（詳見圖表四）（圖表四）4（二）結案情況（二）結案情況在案件數量快速增長與案件難度日益增大的嚴峻形勢下，法庭全體干警銳意精進、潛心鉆研，高質量完成各項審判任務。2019 年審結技術類案件 111 件，結案率為 59.04%；2020年審結技術類案件 266 件，結案率為 76.87%；2021 年審結技術類案件 351 件，結案率為 72.07%；2022 年審結技術類案件 280 件，結案率為 84.08%。結案率總體穩步提升。（三）案件呈現的特點（三）案件呈現的特點一是案件數量總體攀升。一

17、是案件數量總體攀升。2020年收案較2019年增加43.09%（2019年4月1日正式對外履職），2021年收案較2020年增加51.3%，2022年受疫情及管轄制度調整影響，收案總數較2021年雖回落51.6%，但權屬、侵權類等專業難度較大的案件較上年增加46.58%。二是案件類型更加豐富二是案件類型更加豐富，“卡脖卡脖子子”關鍵核心技術與關鍵核心技術與“專精特新專精特新”新領域新業態糾紛層出不新領域新業態糾紛層出不窮窮。從案由上看，除傳統專利、計算機軟件、技術秘密等案件外，集成電路布圖設計糾紛、植物新品種糾紛等新案件不斷涌現。從訴爭領域來看，諸多案件涉及“高精尖”的核心技術領域，除傳統的機

18、械、光電、化學等領域外，微電子芯片、納米、量子點、種子、生物醫藥等技術領域糾紛大量涌現，復雜的技術事實給司法審判帶來更大挑戰。三是利益平是利益平衡日益復雜衡日益復雜。知識產權涉及利益復雜，尤其是隨著科技創新的發展，在涉及“高精尖”領域的專利、技術秘密等案件中，權利邊界的界定直接影響到個人利益與公共利益的平衡，如 5 何精準定位權利邊界，準確把握多層次價值取向，進而平衡個人利益和公共利益的關系，都對司法審判提出更高的要求。四是涉外案件明顯增加四是涉外案件明顯增加，涌現出一批具有國際影響力的精品涌現出一批具有國際影響力的精品案件案件。截至2023年3月31日，共計受理涉外技術類案件24件，占比2.

19、18%。審理了涉納米、三星、戴森、環盛、貝比贊等諸多有國際影響力的跨國知識產權糾紛案件，平等保護中外市場主體權益，打造公正權威的國際司法形象。五是審判質五是審判質效不斷提升效不斷提升，審理了一批全國審理了一批全國、全市首創性案件全市首創性案件。法庭作出全國首例適用懲罰性賠償的涉外專利侵權判決；作出全國首例涉外發明專利案件海關臨時禁令；審理天津首例以許可費認定損失數額的侵害技術秘密刑事案件；審理天津首例植物新品種案件，打造出一批標桿案例，精品成果顯著。二、二、實施精品工程，護航實施精品工程，護航創新驅動發展國家戰略創新驅動發展國家戰略（一）（一）加強關鍵核心技術保護加強關鍵核心技術保護，保障戰略

20、新興產業發展保障戰略新興產業發展創新是引領發展的第一動力，是貫徹新發展理念、構建新發展格局、推動高質量發展的必然要求。法庭緊扣天津高質量發展要求，找準司法服務保障創新發展切入點，加強對“卡脖子”關鍵核心技術、戰略新型產業、技術密集型產業及原始創新成果的保護，發揮技術類案件審理對科技創新的帶動效應。加強芯片領域知識產權保護，審結國內某手機基帶芯片公司與某科技公司侵害發明專利權糾紛案。該案原告系國內手機基帶芯片領軍企業，其生產的28納米手機基帶芯片為該領域核心技術，法庭精準查明技術事實，及時作出判決，高效保護涉案專利技術。加強對高端裝備材料領域知識 6 產權保護，注重促成技術成果轉化應用，審結納米

21、公司與三星公司侵害發明專利權案件。該案中，納米公司系全球三大量子點材料研發高精尖企業，涉案專利“納米顆?！毕盗孔狱c材料核心專利，雙方在美國德克薩斯州東區聯邦地區法院、德國杜塞爾多夫法院存在平行國際訴訟，最終，法庭助力納米公司與三星公司達成全球和解，有效推進了全球高端電子產業領域技術成果的轉化交易和運用創新。加大集成電路布圖設計保護，促進微電子技術產業健康發展，審理天津某執行器公司與張某某集成電路布圖設計糾紛案。該案涉及智能型閥門電動裝置控制集成電路布圖，案涉集成電路布圖復雜，審理難度大，在集成電路布圖設計案件中具有典型性，本案的審理積極回應數字技術創新領域司法需求。（二）（二）加強制造業知識產

22、權保護加強制造業知識產權保護，推動制造業轉型升級推動制造業轉型升級天津市堅持制造業立市戰略部署，高端化、智能化、綠色化的制造業發展離不開創新驅動，更需要知識產權保駕護航。法庭找準服務保障制造業高質量發展的結合點、著力點，通過司法審判助力天津建設全國先進制造研發基地。加強對智能制造業和數字產業創新保護，審結天津某科技公司與天津某公司技術合同糾紛案。該案涉及光伏板自動清掃機器人與光伏板自動噴涂機器人制造研發，法庭逐條梳理技術協議，對照組織勘驗，快速高效作出判決，定紛止爭，有效保護工業機器人、人機交互等高端智能制造領域技術成果。加強對現代化數控機電與精密設備制造業技術成果保護，審結天津某機電設備有限

23、公司訴山東某機電公司侵害其“具有軸向推 7 力自我平衡功能的高壓水旋轉噴頭”發明專利案。該案系知產法庭調派技術調查官參與技術事實查明首案，精準查明技術事實，及時制止侵權行為，高效保護權利人合法權益。加強對汽車制造業及新能源產業知識產權保護，審結中國一汽、中汽研工程研究院、中汽研檢測中心、國能新能源、獵豹汽車等眾多涉及新能源、汽車電子、智能網聯等汽車制造業前沿領域案件，服務天津汽車制造業及新能源產業高質量發展。在天津某科技公司與中國一汽公司專利侵權糾紛案件中，涉及“紅旗 HS5”在帶斷開檢測裝置的曲軸箱通風管中使用“基于導電回路機理的管路斷開檢測系統”專利技術糾紛，合議庭以被訴侵權產品合法來源為

24、突破口，主動聯系侵權產品制造商，并成功組織三方達成調解，在保護專利技術的同時促進科技成果應用。依職權適用等同侵權判定，高效保護權利人合法權益，審結某電子公司訴某科技公司侵害“一種手動電動一體式執行機構”專利糾紛案。法庭針對被告將他人專利通過非實質性改動方式實施的侵權行為，依職權主動適用等同侵權判定，精準劃分、比對技術特征，有效保護創新主體合法權益，取得良好社會效果。（三（三）加強種業知識產權保護加強種業知識產權保護，激發植物新品種研發動激發植物新品種研發動力力黨的二十大報告提出，要全方位夯實糧食安全根基，深入實施種業振興行動，確保中國人的飯碗牢牢端在自己手中。種子是農業的“芯片”，種業知識產權

25、保護事關國家糧食安全與鄉村振興戰略實施。天津作為重要種源地和新品種科研 8 培育聚集地，需要強有力的種業知識產權司法保障。法庭加強對植物新品種的保護，審結天津市首例侵害植物新品種權糾紛案件“濟麥 22”植物新品種侵權案，該案審理中，合議庭走訪行政執法機關，調取了與本案關聯的行政處罰案卷，抽絲剝繭還原出被告與第三人的交易過程。在充分查清案件事實的基礎上，經法庭主持調解，雙方達成和解并即時履行，充分保障植物新品種權利人的權益，快速高效化解矛盾糾紛，取得良好的社會效果。審理天津兩種業公司間關于某黃瓜植物新品種權糾紛，該案中，法庭依職權向農業農村部及植物新品種保藏中心調取品種樣本并移送鑒定，積極穩妥推

26、進案件進程。法庭還積極對接植物新品種保護需求，與天津市市場監管綜合行政執法總隊共赴市農業農村委員會，就如何以司法審判和行政執法等手段協同保護天津“小站稻”進行調研、座談，為促進種業自主創新和行業健康有序發展提供良好的法治環境，助力天津打造國家種業科技創新和產業發展的重要基地。（四）（四）加強醫藥創新成果保護加強醫藥創新成果保護，助力生物醫藥產業振興助力生物醫藥產業振興中醫藥是中華文明的燦爛瑰寶，中醫藥產業是天津的一抹亮色。法庭主動對接中醫藥企業需求，走訪、調研天津中醫藥百年老字號津藥達仁堂集團股份有限公司，針對中醫藥企業在知識產權保護方面的現實困境，深入探索以知識產權保護為抓手助力天津中醫藥強

27、市建設的路徑，從商標、字號、技術秘密、專利等多領域共同發力，保障天津中醫藥產業的傳承與發展，為建立國內領先、世界知名的中醫藥強 9 市提供知識產權服務。生物醫藥關系人類生存發展與生活品質，法庭持續強化生物醫藥行業知識產權保護。審結美國某醫藥公司與天津某醫藥公司侵害發明專利權糾紛案。該案涉及國際前沿生物醫藥技術領域，法庭創新工作方法，跨區域調派技術調查官，準確聚焦技術事實爭議，快速查明技術問題。審結杭州某生物技術公司與天津某生物技術公司“一種用于肝纖維化和肝硬化檢測的試劑盒”發明專利權糾紛案，因案件專利涉及地方疫情防控核酸檢測工作，法庭嚴防案件的審理對當時嚴峻的疫情防控形勢產生影響，穩妥快速推進

28、案件進度，高質高效解決案件爭議，實現良好的法律效果與社會效果。（五（五）平等保護中外市場主體平等保護中外市場主體，打造打造優質優質國際營商環境國際營商環境知識產權具有國際屬性，中國是推動知識產權國際保護的重要力量。法庭始終堅持依法平等保護中外高新技術企業合法權益，維護科技創新企業核心競爭力，主動融入服務天津市一流營商環境和國際化優質投資環境建設。四年來，法庭審理了涉及美、英、德、法、日等十余個國家的技術類案件，糾紛涉及高端材料、生物醫藥、體育器械等多領域。審結納米技術公司（英國）與三星公司（韓國）涉“納米顆?！卑l明專利權糾紛，助力雙方達成全球和解，實現司法案件促成技術成果轉化的良好效果。審結貝

29、比贊公司（法國）訴河北某玩具公司、河北某童車公司等侵害發明專利案件，該案系全國首例適用懲罰性賠償的涉外專利侵權案，率先將倡導已久的懲罰性賠償司法政策理念和學術觀點成功運用到司 10 法實踐當中。同時該案作出的行為保全裁定也是全國首例在發明專利侵權案件中涉及海關的行為保全裁定，充分運用臨時性保護措施，提高司法救濟的及時性和有效性，達到“嚴保護”與“快保護”并行的效果。審結王子運動集團公司（美國）、霍伊特弓箭公司（美國）訴環耀公司侵害發明專利案，涉案發明專利為“具有多管結構的射箭弓”，該案是產品專利方法特征與結構特征保護范圍具備不同的認定標準的典型案例，在國際貿易繁榮發展與國際體育用品大量出現在國

30、內市場的背景下，該案確立了在既有結構特征又有方法特征的專利案件中，應優先適用結構特征限定的裁判規則，實現在加強對專利權保護力度的同時，防止權利人獲得不當擴大保護的效果。（六（六）規范技術交易市場秩序規范技術交易市場秩序，促進科技成果轉化應用促進科技成果轉化應用黨的二十大報告指出，要營造有利于科技型中小微企業成長的良好環境，推動創新鏈產業鏈資金鏈人才鏈深度融合。知識產權全鏈條體系既包括強化保護體系，又包括完善運營體系和優化服務體系。技術成果的交易服務市場是技術成果實現產能轉化的重要平臺，交易秩序的規范直接關系到技術成果的應用及創新生態環境的營造。法庭積極發揮司法主導作用，通過司法裁判規范、服務、

31、保障優質知識產權服務機構，促進知識產權資源要素的有效配置和流通，最大限度釋放創新創造活力。在審理天津某科技公司與天津某知識產權代理公司專利代理合同糾紛案件中，針對被告已高質量完成專利撰寫、申報等工作，但僅由于原告怠于繳納費用導致專 11 利申請被駁回的情形，依法判令駁回原告要求退還專利費的訴訟請求，保護優質知識產權服務機構的合法權益。以案件裁判規則引領知識產權服務機構行業準則，規范專利代理、轉讓許可、技術成果交易流轉等行為，引導知識產權服務行業健康有序發展。在審理天津某科技公司與天津某專利代理公司以及王某與天津某專利代理公司專利代理合同糾紛案件中，對于代理機構拖延申請專利，專利文件質量不高等違

32、約行為，判令專利代理機構返還收取的代理費，規范專利代理市場，促進專利申請質量和效率的提高。（七（七）保護創新主體合法權益保護創新主體合法權益，激勵全民發明創造熱情激勵全民發明創造熱情科技是第一生產力，人才是第一資源。法庭充分發揮司法主導與引領作用，保障創新主體合法權益，著力營造尊重知識、尊重人才的良好創新氛圍，助力天津打造自主創新的重要源頭和原始創新策源地。法庭妥善處理涉及企業與離職員工的專利歸屬及獎勵的糾紛，堅持既要保護高新技術企業的技術成果，又要保護離職員工獲得報酬權的司法理念，充分激發市場主體創新動力。在吳某與天津某科技公司職務發明創造發明人報酬糾紛一案中，針對雙方對報酬無法達成一致的情

33、況，法庭通過數次溝通，最終調解解決該案，保護了離職員工作為發明人獲得報酬獎勵的權利。通過司法裁判，依法妥善處理科技成果權屬認定、權利轉讓、利益分配糾紛，提高知識產權的利用率、變現率和回報率，支持科技成果轉化應用和產業化。在因科公司與某科技公司專利權權屬糾紛系列案件中，針對被告將職務發明據為己有的事實，法庭判 12 決專利權及申請權歸原告所有，有效保護企業的知識產權，激發企業的創新動力。在天津汽車模具公司訴天津某科技公司、湖南某公司侵害技術秘密糾紛中，依法懲治離職員工竊取原單位技術秘密違法行為，保護創新主體在汽車模具領域技術優勢。三、創新三、創新機制舉措，釋放司法服務高質量發展新動能機制舉措，釋

34、放司法服務高質量發展新動能（一（一）構建縱橫聯動平臺構建縱橫聯動平臺，推動知識產權全鏈條大保護推動知識產權全鏈條大保護1.1.構建構建“京津冀京津冀”知識產權司法保護協作機制知識產權司法保護協作機制。天津三中院深入貫徹落實黨的二十大關于推進京津冀協同發展的戰略部署及全面加強知識產權保護的要求，與北京知識產權法院、河北雄安中院共同簽署加強知識產權司法保護合作框架協議，打造“京津冀”知識產權大保護聯動協同平臺，有力開拓京津冀知識產權協同保護事業新渠道、新路徑，有效推進三地法院在人才培養、司法協同、聯合調研等方面的協同互補，護航京津冀知識產權司法保護高質量發展。2.構建知識產權司法與行政執法聯動機制

35、。構建知識產權司法與行政執法聯動機制。創新驅動是一項系統工程，市場主體創新意愿和創新投入的提升，有賴于嚴密的創新保護體系，包括審查授權、行政執法、司法保護等各個環節。為進一步強化知識產權全鏈條保護，天津三中院與天津海關、市文旅局、市市場監管委、市知識產權局聯合簽訂知識產權司法與行政執法聯動機制，搭建司法與行政執法聯動平臺，統籌制度機制、業務領域、人才培養、黨建共建四個協同，合力構建知識產權協同保護新格局。天津三中院還與天津市知識產權保護中心建立 13 司法行政聯動保護機制，會同濱海新區法院與濱海新區知識產權局、中國（濱海新區）知識產權保護中心搭建司法保護與行政保護合作機制，與國家知識產權局專利

36、審查協作天津中心建立協作機制，健全創造、保護、運用、管理和服務全鏈條，為激勵創新發展、深化知識產權運用、打造知識產權保護高地提供有力支撐和堅強保障。3.構建司法與高校知識產權保護協作機制。構建司法與高校知識產權保護協作機制。市委市政府“十項行動”明確提出科教興市人才強市行動。為充分釋放高校智力資源與司法保護新動能，天津三中院與天津科技大學、濱海新區人民法院簽訂知識產權保護協作機制，構建知識產權保護理論實踐創新轉化平臺，暢通高校智力資源與法院司法保護的融合渠道。雙方加強在技術調查官選聘、知識產權專家庫、法律實習生機制、學術研討及交流、知識產權人才培養、黨建共建等領域的協作，扎實推進知識產權保護的

37、理論研究與成果轉化，共同提升知識產權司法審判水平與高校人才培養質量。（二（二）持續完善辦案機制持續完善辦案機制，優化知產案件審判質效指標優化知產案件審判質效指標1.1.“三合一三合一”審判機制運行成效顯著審判機制運行成效顯著。加大刑事打擊力度，嚴懲犯罪行為，刑事震懾效果明顯。積極貫徹寬嚴相濟的刑事政策，重拳打擊侵害創新創造的犯罪行為，在打擊犯罪的同時實現對高新技術企業關鍵核心技術的有效保護。法庭公開審理趙某某侵犯商業秘密罪一案并當庭宣判，被告人當庭悔罪認罪并表示服從判決不上訴，該案系最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院關于辦理侵犯知識產權刑事案件具體應 14 用法律若干問題的解釋（三）施行后，首例以合

38、理許可費確定損失數額的案件，回應了司法實踐中長期存在的單純獲取型侵犯商業秘密行為入罪難的現實問題，為公、檢、法等司法機關開展相關刑事工作提供了良好的范例，也為法律開創性適用提供了鮮活的教材。妥善審理行政案件，促進行政與司法標準統一。四年來，法庭共審結技術類知識產權行政案件 5 件，涉訴的具體行政行為涵蓋技術秘密、專利侵權等多方面。在行政案件審理中，行政機關主要負責人出庭，相關行政機關旁聽庭審，新聞媒體對庭審活動做了報道。通過行政案件的審理，法庭積極履行司法審查職能，監督、規范行政執法，積極引導知識產權行政執法機關的調查取證、證據審查、侵權判定、責任承擔等處理標準與司法標準相統一。2.2.多元化

39、技術事實查明體系持續健全多元化技術事實查明體系持續健全。天津知產法庭作為天津全市技術類案件的集中管轄法庭，受理案件涉及諸多理工科知識，如何客觀、科學、中立查明技術事實成為審理該類案件的重點和難點。法庭在全國首創跨域調派技術調查官，通過“全國法院技術調查人才共享機制”向“全國法院技術調查人才庫”申請最高法院異地調派技術調查官。天津三中院與國家知識產權局專利審查協作天津中心簽訂知識產權工作合作框架協議，與天津科技大學簽訂知識產權保護協作機制，聘用技術調查官參與案件技術事實查明。制定技術調查官參與訴訟活動工作規則，參與編撰最高院技術調查官工作手冊，完善規章制度。截止目前，共選聘技術調查官 32 名，

40、技術調查官參與案件審理 110 余人 15 次，涉及專利、技術秘密、集成電路布圖、計算機軟件等多類型案件，高質高效完成技術事實查明。當前，技術調查官制度運行規范、增補流轉順暢，在健全多元化技術事實查明機制，提高知識產權案件審判質效方面，形成了全國可借鑒的“天津模式”。3.3.司法改革創新舉措有效運用。司法改革創新舉措有效運用。探索專業化審判模式。組建技術類案件審判團隊，精細化審理，精準化裁判。注重每一案件從庭審、文書到案例、調研的全流程挖掘培育，為打造出具有重大影響力的精品案件提供保障。用好法律手段解決舉證困境。按照證據規則，及時向雙方當事人明示基本證據清單；加大依申請調取證據力度，對于當事人

41、無法取得的或者取證遇阻風險較大的情形，及時調查收集證據；廣泛使用律師調查令、協助調查函等形式，高效便捷查清案件重要事實，著力破解知識產權維權“舉證難”問題，公證高效保護權利人合法權益。充分發揮多元解紛機制。積極加強與市知產保護中心、濱海知產保護中心的合作，委托兩家保護中心作為特邀調解組織調解技術類案件。自建立合作機制以來，法庭先后委托調解技術類案件 200 余件，效果良好。深入推動智慧法院建設。堅持以創新的技術保護創新，充分利用智慧法院平臺，深入推動在線庭審，制定在線庭審規程，為在線庭審提供規則支撐。針對疑難復雜的技術類案件，探索出一條線上分解、比對技術特征之路，視效客觀真實，運行穩定可靠，極

42、大便利當事人訴訟，深受當事人好評。（三（三）聚焦創新發展需求聚焦創新發展需求，強化司法保障科技創新職能強化司法保障科技創新職能 16 1.1.注重調研成果轉化，為科技創新發展大局建言獻策注重調研成果轉化，為科技創新發展大局建言獻策。法庭始終聚焦關乎天津創新發展的戰略性、現實性重大問題開展調研，并將調研成果轉化為服務大局的實效，為天津市科技創新發展提供決策參考。向市委辦公廳報送天津知識產權法庭服務保障天津知識產權強市建設的調研，從精品案件戰略、營造創新環境、構建大保護格局等方面總結成果經驗，并深入分析現存問題及解決建議。報送四方面問題制約天津市科技型企業發展，結合審理的技術類案件特點，深入分析案

43、件特點及成因建議。報送計算機軟件四方面特點制約智能制造產業發展，圍繞智能軟件產業，從審理的案件入手，分析問題、查找原因，提出對策。充分發揮司法建議作用，向行政機關及科創企業發出司法建議 4 份，抓前端，治未病，促進社會治理水平提升。積極參與規章制度的制定完善。在天津知識產權保護條例制定過程中，我院承辦全市法院系統座談會，立足司法實踐經驗，提出了突出天津特色等 5 項原則性建議和深化多元解紛、加強侵犯商業秘密和重復侵權懲治等 24 項具體建議，均得到市人大常委會采納。2.2.推進訴訟服務前移，精準回應科技型企業司法需求推進訴訟服務前移，精準回應科技型企業司法需求。濱海新區作為首批國家級高新區和國

44、家自主創新示范區，聚集了全市大量科創產業和高新技術資源。法庭主動將司法審判服務與濱海新區高質量發展、自貿區改革試驗等重大政策銜接,深入廣泛開展調查研究，不斷增強司法服務保障的前瞻性、精準性、有效性。2022 年，在習近平總書記視察濱海 17-中關村科技園三周年之際，法庭赴濱海-中關村科技園開展走訪調研，了解園內智能科技產業、生命健康產業、新能源、新材料產業等高新技術企業對知識產權保護的需求，針對性講解專利申請步驟、注意事項、維權方式和技術秘密的保護等內容，解決重點產業及關鍵技術中對知識產權保護的需求。針對某些企業法律意識不強的問題，開展科研成果轉化相關普法宣傳，提高科研機構與科研工作者對相關法

45、律的認識水平，筑牢科研成果轉化的權利基礎，為企業提供知識產權風險預警，降低訴訟風險。法庭還組織赴醫藥企業康希諾公司、人工智能企業科大訊飛公司、新型制造業企業特變電工變壓器有限公司等轄區重點科技型企業開展調研走訪，主動聽取企業對核心技術知識產權保護的司法需求，明確工作思路，為科技型企業發展提供更優質服務，服務保障濱海新區高質量發展示范引領。（四（四）拓展普法宣傳陣地拓展普法宣傳陣地，厚植保護知識產權輿論氛圍厚植保護知識產權輿論氛圍1.1.多領域司法宣傳多領域司法宣傳。四年來，法庭始終高度重視宣傳工作，持續傳播天津知識產權司法保護最強音。連續三年召開新聞發布會，發布 3 篇知識產權保護白皮書及 2

46、0 個典型案例，及時公開知識產權保護狀況與服務科技創新成果。充分發揮新聞媒體優勢，打造多媒體融合推進、線上線下協同發力宣傳矩陣。積極開展普法宣傳，受邀與天津電視臺合作拍攝知識產權司法服務創新發展宣傳片，多次在天津電視臺新聞頻道、科教頻道、天津交通廣播頻道播出。廣泛開展法律培訓，受邀赴天津市知識產權局、國家專利局審查協作天津 18 中心、市場監管委、轄區企業、學校開展專利知識培訓講座，普及專利法律知識。高質量組織線上普法宣講，定期在抖音、微信公眾號等新媒體平臺發布普法視頻，以生動活潑的內容和形式，向群眾充分匯報、展現知產保護成果。2.2.全方位司法公開全方位司法公開。法庭始終堅持司法者普法理念，

47、以司法公開為普法陣地，積極主動向人民群眾匯報法庭審判工作。著力打造“津知風采”與“津知庭審”司法公開品牌，通過“津知風采”平臺及時準確地公開法庭工作動態、典型案例、法律法規等，法治日報 人民法院報 天津日報等具有影響力的媒體報刊平臺先后刊發數十篇法庭工作報道，知識產權司法保護高地效應凸顯。利用“津知庭審”平臺，選取典型案例組織系列庭審觀摩，主動邀請人大代表、政協委員、特約監督員和媒體記者現場觀摩，將每一起典型案件都辦成生動的“法治公開課”，不斷增強全民尊重創新、保護創新意識，著力營造一流創新生態。四、加強隊伍建設，提升保護創新發展能力水平四、加強隊伍建設，提升保護創新發展能力水平人才是興國之大

48、計，隊伍建設是建設全國一流知識產權法庭的基礎和保障。四年來，法庭高度重視隊伍建設，打造了一支政治信念堅定、專業素質過硬的知產審判隊伍，培樹了一批先進個人，法庭被評為天津法院系統先進集體，黨建品牌“津知先鋒”獲評黨員先鋒團隊。法庭 1 人獲評“天津市政法系統人民滿意的政法干警”，1 人獲評“天津市最美家庭”，1 人榮立二等功，1 人榮立三等功，8 人獲評優秀共產黨員，1 人獲評黨員先鋒崗，1 人獲評黨員業務標兵。19（一）固本強基，聚力政治能力建設（一）固本強基，聚力政治能力建設四年來，法庭始終堅持黨對政法工作的絕對領導，深入學習領會黨的十九大、十九屆歷次全會和黨的二十大精神，堅定捍衛“兩個確立

49、”、堅決做到“兩個維護”。始終以習近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想為指導，認真落實習近平法治思想，深入貫徹習近平總書記對政法工作的重要指示批示和對知識產權保護的重要論述精神，圍繞服務創新發展大局，扎實開展各項工作。全面準確貫徹落實中央、市委關于加強知識產權保護和科技創新的各項決策部署，不斷將黨的創新理論與知識產權審判深度融合。打造“津知先鋒”“津知風采”“津知講堂”“津知庭審”黨建品牌矩陣，進一步強化黨建引領、融合、服務的特色理念，培育特色鮮明、亮點突出的支部活動，積極引導青年干警在學思踐悟、勇擔重任、爭創業績上當先鋒、做表率，持續提升青年干警的綜合能力素質，不斷增強支部的向心力和凝聚力。（二）

50、（二）提質增效，強化業務能力提升提質增效，強化業務能力提升知識產權審判具有高度技術性、復雜性、專業性和國際性，從事知產審判應具備精通法律、熟悉技術、立足國情、放眼世界的能力素質。四年來，法庭以“專家型法官”工程為載體，深入推進精品戰略實施。依托“津知講堂”平臺，定期圍繞政策法規、核心專利、優良植物新品種、高水平集成電路布圖設計等知識產權前沿熱點問題及司法實踐難點問題開展講座研討，釋放研學互動的強大勢能。主動加強對外學習交流，委派審判人員與市場監管委開展商業秘密交流 20 研討、與南開區知產局開展區塊鏈數據存證平臺交流研討，參加最高院組織的開源軟件涉訴難點問題研討，不斷提升對解決知識產權前沿難點

51、問題的參與度、貢獻度。積極參與規范性文件的制定完善，為最高院關于知識產權民事訴訟證據的若干規定，天津高院關于知識產權侵權案件適用懲罰性賠償的意見等規范性文件的制定提供修改意見建議，多項建議被上級法院采納。調研成果豐碩，2 人獲得第三十一屆全國法院系統學術討論會優秀獎，1 人在國家核心期刊法律適用上發表文章一篇，1 篇調研獲評天津法院系統優秀重點調研課題，1 人獲 2020 年度天津法院學術討論會優秀獎，1 人獲第三屆京津冀司法論壇征文三等獎，2 人獲第十一屆京津滬渝司法論壇論文優秀獎，2 人獲中國行為法學會“天大中國司法論壇”二等獎、1 人獲三等獎、2 人獲優秀獎。精品案例不斷涌現，法庭多篇案

52、例分別獲評最高人民法院 50 件知識產權保護典型案件、天津法院十大影響案例、天津法院服務保障“一帶一路”建設典型案例、天津知識產權司法保護典型案例等。多個庭審獲評天津市法院優秀庭審一等獎，多篇文書獲評天津市全市法院精品文書成果、全市法院優秀文書一、二、三等獎，精品工程成效顯著。21 結束語黨的二十大指出，科技是第一生產力、人才是第一資源、創新是第一動力。當今世界正經歷百年未有之大變局，我國正處于實現中華民族偉大復興關鍵時期，創新驅動發展戰略深入實施，服務保障創新發展與科技自立自強，是技術類知識產權審判工作突出的主題。知識產權創造力一日千里、發展力層出不窮，面對知識產權司法保護中的新業態、新領域

53、、新問題，天津知產法庭將始終堅持以習近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想為指導，緊盯國家戰略需求和天津發展需要，緊緊圍繞高質量發展主題，完整、準確、全面貫徹新發展理念，凝心聚力服務市委、市政府“十項行動”實施，提升司法質效，維護創新動能，以舉措之新、機制之新、服務之新，有力保障天津創新驅動發展和全面建設社會主義現代化大都市。22 Tianjin Intellectual Property TribunalServing and Ensuring Scientific andTechnological Innovation(2019.4 2023.4)Sinceitsestablishment,Tia

54、njinIntellectualPropertyTribunal has concentrated on the jurisdiction of civil andadministrative cases of intellectual property of the first instanceaswellasotherintellectualpropertycaseswithinthejurisdiction in Tianjin,including patents,new plant varieties,designs of layout of integrated circuits,t

55、echnical secrets,computer software,disputes involving well-known trademarksand monopolies.Following the adjustment of jurisdictionalregulations in May 2022,the Tianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunalhasconcentrateditsjurisdictiononcivilandadministrative intellectual property cases of first instance as

56、 wellas other intellectual property cases within the jurisdiction inTianjin,including invention patents,utility model patents,newplant varieties,designs of layout of integrated circuits,technicalsecrets,computer software ownership,infringement disputesand monopoly disputes.Over the past four years,t

57、he Tribunalhas consistently adhered to the working framework of Based inTianjin,Oriented to the Country,and Open to the World,and hasalways planned its work in the overall context of servinginnovation and development,and has impartially and efficientlytried a large number of high-quality model cases

58、 in the city,the 23 country,and evenwithmultinational influence,and hassafeguarded the self-reliance and self-improvement of scienceand technology in the new era with high standard judicial trials.I.Trial of Technological Intellectual Property Cases(I)Acceptance of Cases1.Statistics by year:As of Ma

59、rch 31,2023,the Tribunalhas accepted a total of 1,102 technological cases;in particular,188 technological cases(185 cases of first instance and 3 casesof second instance)were accepted in 2019;269 technologicalcases(all cases of first instance)were accepted in 2020;407technological cases(404 cases of

60、 first instance and 3 cases ofsecond instance)were accepted in 2021;197 technological cases(196 cases of first instance and 1 case of second instance)wereaccepted in 2022;41 technological cases(40 cases of firstinstance and 1 case of second instance)were accepted in Q1 of2023.(For details,please ref

61、er to Figure 1)(Figure 1)24 2.Statistics by case:Among the technological casesaccepted,684 were patent cases,303 were computer softwarecases,73 were technology contract cases,17 were technologysecret cases,15 were cases involving recognition of well-knowntrademark,7 were monopoly dispute cases,2 wer

62、e new plantvariety rights cases,and 1 was an integrated circuit layoutdesign case.Among all the technological cases accepted,therewere 1,096 civil cases,5 administrative cases and 1 criminalcase.(For details,please refer to Figure 2)(Figure 2)3.Statistics by centralized jurisdiction:Among all the ca

63、sesaccepted,1,029(93.37%)were technological cases of firstinstance involving patents,new plant varieties,integrated circuit 25 layout designs,technical secrets,computer software,recognitionofwell-knowntrademarksandmonopolydisputesundercentralized jurisdiction,and 73(6.63%)were technologicalcases und

64、er non-centralized jurisdiction.(For details,pleaserefer to Figure 3)(Figure 3)Among the cases under centralized jurisdiction,387 wereinvention and utility model patent cases,303 were computersoftware cases,222 were design patent cases,75 were otherpatent cases,17 were technology secrets cases,15 we

65、re disputecases involving the recognition of well-known trademarks,7were monopoly dispute cases,2 were dispute cases of new plantvarieties,and 1 was an integrated circuit layout design case.(Fordetails,please refer to Figure 4)26(Figure 4)(II)Closed CasesGiven the severe situation of rapid growth in

66、 the number ofcases as well as the increasing difficulty of the cases,all theofficials of the Tribunal are determined to improve,study andcomplete the trial assignments with high quality.In 2019,a total of 111 technological cases were closed,with a closure rate of 59.04%;in 2020,266 technological ca

67、seswere closed,with a closure rate of 76.87%;in 2021,351technological cases were closed,with a closure rate of 72.07%;and in 2022,280 technological cases were closed,with a closurerate of 84.08%.The overall case closure rate has been steadilyimproving.(III)Case CharacteristicsFirst,the overall rise

68、in the number of cases.The number of 27 cases accepted in 2020 is 43.09%higher than that in 2019(theTribunal officially assumed its duties on April 1,2019),thenumber of cases accepted in 2021 is 51.3%higher than that in2020,and the total number of cases accepted in 2022 is 51.6%lower than that in 20

69、21 due to the pandemic and the adjustmentof the jurisdictional system,however,the number of cases withrelatively high professional difficulty such as ownership andinfringement was 46.58%higher than that in the previous year.Second,the types of cases are further enriched,with theemerging disputes ove

70、r bottlenecked key core technologiesandinnewfieldsandnewbusinessmodelsfeaturingProfessionalism,Refinement,Specialty and Novelty.From theperspective of the causes of cases,in addition to traditionalcases of patents,computer software and technology secrets,newcases such as disputes over layout designs

71、 of integrated circuitsand disputes over new plant varieties have emerged.From theperspective of litigation areas,many cases have involved coretechnology areas of high-grade,precision and advanced,inadditiontothetraditionalfieldssuchasmachinery,photoelectricity and chemistry,disputes in the technolo

72、gicalfields of microelectronic chips,nano,quantum dots,seeds,biopharmaceuticals,etc.have emerged in large numbers,and thefact of complex technology has posed greater challenges tojudicial trials.Third,the balance of interests is increasinglycomplicated.Intellectual property rights involve complicate

73、d 28 interests,in particular,with the development of scientific andtechnological innovation,in cases involving the field ofhigh-grade,precision and advanced such as patents andtechnology secrets,the delimitation of the boundary of rightsdirectly affects the balance between individual interests andpu

74、blic interests,so that the precise orientation of the boundaryof rights,accurate grasp of multi-level value orientations,andthen balanced relationship between individual interests andpublic interests,have imposed higher requirements on judicialtrials.Fourth,thenumberofforeign-relatedcaseshassignific

75、antly increased,and a number of high-quality cases withinternational influence have emerged.As of March 31,2023,atotal of 24 cases involving foreign technology have beenaccepted,accounting for 2.18%.The Tribunal has tried anumber of transnational intellectual property disputes withinternationalinflu

76、enceinvolvingNano,Samsung,Dyson,Maxxium,Babyzen,etc.,and equally protected the rights andinterests of Chinese and foreign market players,thereby creatinga fair and authoritative international judicial image.Fifth,thequality and efficiency of the trial has been continuouslyimproved,and a number of fi

77、rst cases in the country and the cityhave been tried.The Tribunal has made the first foreign patentinfringement verdict with punitive damages;issued the firstcustoms temporary injunction for foreign invention patent cases;tried the first criminal case of infringement of technical secrets 29 in Tianj

78、in with the amount of damages determined by license fee;tried the first case of new plant variety in Tianjin,and created anumber of model cases with remarkable high-quality results.II.Implementing high-quality projects and safeguardingthe national strategy of innovation-driven development(I)Enhance

79、the protection of key core technologies andsafeguard the development of strategic emerging industriesInnovation is the first driving force to lead development,aswell as the inevitable requirement for implementing the newdevelopment concept,building a new development pattern andpromoting high-quality

80、 development.The Tribunal has closelyfollowed the requirements of high-quality development ofTianjin,identified the starting point of judicial services toguarantee the development of innovation,strengthened theprotection of bottleneck key core technologies,new strategicindustries,technology-intensiv

81、e industries as well as originalinnovation achievements,and given play to the driving effect oftechnology cases on scientific and technological innovation.TheTribunal has strengthened the protection of intellectual propertyrights in the field of chips,and closed a dispute between adomestic cell phon

82、e baseband chip company and a technologycompany for infringement of invention patent rights.Theplaintiff in this case was a leading domestic cell phone basebandchip enterprise,with its production of 28nm cell phone basebandchip as the core technology in this field.The Tribunal accurately 30 identifi

83、ed the technical facts and made a timely judgment toefficiently protect the patent technology involved.The Tribunalhas reinforced the protection of intellectual property rights in thefieldofhigh-endequipmentmaterials,emphasizedthetransformation and application of technological achievements,and close

84、d the case of infringement of invention patents byNano and Samsung.In this case,Nano was one of the top threequantum dot material R&D enterprises in the world,and thepatent in question,nano particles,was the core patent ofquantum dot material.Both parties had parallel internationallitigations in the

85、 Federal District Court of the Eastern District ofTexas in the United States and the Court of Dsseldorf inGermany,andfinally,the Tribunal facilitatedNanoandSamsung in reaching a global settlement,which effectivelypromoted the transformation of technological achievements andapplication of innovation

86、in the global high-end electronicsindustry.TheTribunalhasintensifiedtheprotectionofintegrated circuit layout design and promoted the healthydevelopment of microelectronics technology industry,and triedthe dispute between a particular actuator company in Tianjin andan individual with the family name

87、of Zhang concerningintegrated circuit layout design.This case involved a layout ofintelligent valve electric device control IC,which involvedcomplex IC layout and difficult trial,and was typical in IClayout design cases,and the trial of this case actively responded 31 to the judicial demand in the f

88、ield of digital technologyinnovation.(II)Enhancetheprotectionofmanufacturingintellectual property rights and promote the transformationand upgrading of manufacturing industryTianjinadherestothestrategicdeploymentofamanufacturing-based city,and the development of high-end,intelligentandgreenmanufactu

89、ringindustrycannotbeseparated from innovation-driven and requires the protection ofintellectual property rights.The Tribunal has identified theintegration and focus points to serve and guarantee thehigh-quality development of the manufacturing industry,andassisted Tianjin in building a national adva

90、nced manufacturingR&D base through judicial trials.The Tribunal has reinforcedthe protection of innovation in smart manufacturing and digitalindustries and closed the technical contract dispute between atechnology company in Tianjin and a company in Tianjin.Thiscase involved R&D in the manufacture o

91、f automatic cleaningrobots for photovoltaic panels and automatic spraying robots forPV panels.The Tribunal sorted out the technical agreementsarticle by article,organized surveys in comparison,made quickand efficient judgments,settled disputes and stopped disputes,and effectively protected the techn

92、ical achievements in the fieldof high-end intelligent manufacturing such as industrial robotsand human-computer interaction.The Tribunal has enhanced the 32 protectionofthetechnicalachievementsofthemodernnumerical control electromechanical and precision equipmentmanufacturing industry,and closed the

93、 case of a mechanical andelectrical equipment company in Tianjin against a mechanicaland electrical company in Shandong for infringing its inventionpatent of high-pressure water rotary nozzle with axial thrustself-balancing function.This case was the first case in which atechnical investigator was a

94、ssigned by the Intellectual PropertyTribunal to engage in technical fact finding,to accuratelyidentify technical facts,timely suppress infringement andefficiently protect the legitimate rights and interests of the rightholder.The Tribunal has intensified the protection of intellectualproperty rights

95、 of automobile manufacturing industry and newenergy industry,and closed a number of cases related tocutting-edge fields of automobile manufacturing such as newenergy,automobileelectronicsandintelligentnetworkconnection for China FAW,CATARC(Tianjin)AutomotiveEngineering Research Institute,CATARC Test

96、ing Center,CNNENew Energy,Leopard Automobile,etc.,to serve the high-qualitydevelopment of automobile manufacturing industry and newenergy industry in Tianjin.In a patent infringement disputebetween a technology company in Tianjin and China FAWinvolving the use of the patent technology Hongqi HS5 in

97、thecrankcase ventilation pipe with disconnection detection devicebased on the conductive circuit mechanism of the pipeline 33 disconnection detection system,the Collegial Bench took thelegal source of the infringing product as a breakthrough,initiated contact with the infringing product manufacturer

98、,andsuccessfully organized mediation among the three parties,whichpromotedtheapplicationofscientificandtechnologicalachievements while protecting the patent technology.TheTribunal has applied the equivalent infringement decision exofficio to efficiently protect the legitimate rights and interests of

99、the right holders and closed the patent dispute case of anelectroniccompanyagainstatechnologycompanyforinfringement of a manual electric integrated actuator.TheTribunal has applied the equivalent infringement decision exofficio for the defendants infringement of the patent of othersby means of non-s

100、ubstantial alteration,and accurately delineatedand compared the technical features to effectively protect thelegitimate rights and interests of the innovation subject,whichhas achieved favorable social results.(III)Strengthen the protection of intellectual propertyrights in the seed industry,and ins

101、pire the research anddevelopment of new plant varietiesThe Report of the Twentieth CPC National Congressproposed to strengthen the foundation of food security on allfronts,and to further implement the revitalization of the seedindustry so as to guarantee the food safety for the Chinesepeople firmly.

102、Seeds are regarded as the chips of agriculture,34 and the protection of intellectual property rights in the seedindustryiscrucialtonationalfoodsecurityandtheimplementation of the rural revitalization strategy.Tianjin,as animportant base for seed source as well as a gathering place forresearch and br

103、eeding of new varieties,requires robust judicialprotection of intellectual property rights in the seed industry.The Tribunal has strengthened the protection of new plantvarieties and closed the first case of infringement of new plantvariety rights in Tianjin-Ji Mai 22 new plant varietyinfringement c

104、ase.In the trial of this case,the Collegiate Benchvisited the administrative law enforcement organs and retrievedthe administrative punishment case files associated with thiscase to restore the transaction process of the defendant and thethird party.Based on the full investigation of the facts of th

105、ecase,both parties reached a settlement and performed itimmediately upon the mediation hosted by the Tribunal,whichfully protected the rights and interests of the rights holders ofnew plant varieties and quickly and efficiently resolved theconflicts and disputes,thereby achieving favorable social ef

106、fects.The Tribunal tried a dispute between two seed companies inTianjin over the rights of a new cucumber plant variety.In thiscase,the Tribunal ex officio retrieved the variety samples fromthe Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the NewPlant Variety Conservation Center and transferred

107、 them foridentification,actively and steadily promoting the case process.35 The Tribunal has also engaged in research and discussion on theprotection of Xiaozhan Rice in Tianjin by means of judicialtrial and administrative law enforcement so as to providefavorable rules of law environment for the pr

108、omotion ofindependent innovation and healthy and orderly development ofthe seed industry and assist Tianjin in building an important basefor national seed industry science and technology innovation aswell as industrial development.(IV)Strengthentheprotectionofpharmaceuticalinnovation achievements an

109、d contribute to the revitalizationof the biomedical industryTraditional Chinese medicine is the splendid treasure oftraditional civilization in China,and the Chinese medicineindustry is a brilliant symbol of Tianjin.The Tribunal hasproactively dovetailed with the demands of TCM enterprises,visited a

110、nd researched the century-old TCM company in Tianjin-Tianjin Pharm DaRenTang Group Co.,Ltd.and explored thepath of assisting the construction of a competitive TCM city inTianjin by taking IPR protection as the entry point,and madejoint efforts in multiple fields such as trademark,brand name,technolo

111、gy secret and patent to safeguard the inheritance anddevelopmentofTCMindustryinTianjinandprovideintellectual property services for the establishment of a leadingdomestic and world-renowned strong TCM city.Biomedicine isclosely related to the survival and development of human beings 36 and the qualit

112、y of life,and the Tribunal has continued tostrengthen the protection of intellectual property rights in thebiomedicalindustry.IthasclosedadisputebetweenapharmaceuticalcompanyintheUnitedStatesandapharmaceutical company in Tianjin on infringement of patentrightofinvention.Thiscaseinvolvedthecutting-ed

113、gebiomedical technology field in the international context.TheTribunal innovated its working method by deploying technicalinvestigators across regions to accurately focus on technicalfactual disputes and quickly identify technical issues.Thetribunal concluded a dispute between a biotechnology compan

114、yin Hangzhou and a biotechnology company in Tianjin over akit for detecting liver fibrosis and cirrhosis.As the patentinvolved nucleic acid testing for local epidemic prevention andcontrol,the Tribunal strictly prevented the case from affectingthe severe situation of epidemic prevention and control

115、then,andadvanced the progress of the case in a steady and fast manner,and efficiently resolved the dispute with high quality withfavorable legal and social effects.(V)Equal protection of Chinese and foreign marketplayers to create a high-quality international businessenvironmentIntellectual property

116、 rights feature international attributes,and China is an important driving force in the internationalprotection of intellectual property rights.The Tribunal has been 37 adhering to the principle of equal protection of the legitimaterights and interests of Chinese and foreign high-tech enterprisesina

117、ccordancewiththelaw,safeguardingthecorecompetitivenessofscienceandtechnologyinnovationenterprises,and proactively integrating into the service offirst-class business environment and the construction of aninternational quality investment environment in Tianjin.Overthe past four years,the Tribunal has

118、 tried technological casesinvolving over ten countries,such as the United States,theUnited Kingdom,Germany,France and Japan,with disputesinvolvingmultiplefieldssuchashigh-endmaterials,biomedicine and sports equipment.The Tribunal has closed thedispute between Nano(UK)and Samsung(South Korea)overthe

119、patent rights of nano particles,and facilitated both partiesto reach a global settlement,thereby achieving the positiveeffect of judicial cases contributing to the transformation oftechnological achievements.The Tribunal has closed the case ofBabyzen(France)against a toy company in Hebei and a strol

120、lercompanyinHebei,whichwasthefirstforeignpatentinfringement case in China to apply punitive damages,and hassuccessfully taken the lead in applying the long-advocatedjudicial policy concept of punitive damages and academic viewstojudicial practices.Meanwhile,theruling on behaviorpreservation made in

121、this case was also the first case of behaviorpreservation ruling involving customs in a patent infringement 38 case in China,which fully leveraged temporary protectionmeasures to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of judicialremedies and achieve the effect of strict protection and fastprotecti

122、on in parallel.The Tribunal has closed the patentinfringement case of Prince Sports Group(US)and HoytArchery(US)against Huanyao Company,in which the patentinvolved was“archery bow with multi-tube structure”.The casewas a representative case in which the scope of protection ofmethod features and stru

123、ctural features of a product patent haddifferent standards of recognition.In the context of theprosperousdevelopmentofinternationaltradeandtheemergence of a large number of international sporting goods inthe domestic market,the case has established the rule that inpatent cases with both structural f

124、eatures and method features,the adjudication rule of limiting the structural features is to beappliedinpreference,therebyrealizingtheeffectofstrengthening the protection of patent rights while preventingthe right holder from improperly expanding the protection.(VI)Regulate the order of the technolog

125、y exchangemarket,and facilitate the transformation and application ofscientific and technological achievementsThe Report of the Twentieth CPC National Congressproposed to create a favourable environment for the growth ofscienceandtechnology-basedsmall,mediumandmicroenterprises,and to promote the in-

126、depth integration of the 39 innovation chain,industry chain,capital chain and talent chain.The overall chain system of intellectual property rights includesnot only strengthening the protection system,but also improvingthe operation system and optimizing the service system.Thetransactionservicemarke

127、tfortechnologicalachievementsserves as an important platform for technological achievementsto realize capacitytransformation,andthe regulation oftransaction order is directly associated with the application oftechnological achievements as well as the creation of innovationecological environment.The

128、Tribunal has actively played aleading judicial role in regulating,serving and safeguardinghigh-quality IP service providers by means of judicial decisions,and has promoted the effective allocation and circulation of IPresource elements to maximize the vigor of innovation andcreativity.In a case of p

129、atent agency contract dispute between ascience and technology company in Tianjin and an intellectualproperty agency in Tianjin,in response to the fact that thedefendant had completed patent drafting and filing with highquality,while the patent application was rejected only due to thenegligence of th

130、e plaintiff in paying the fees,the plaintiffsrequest for refund of patent fees was dismissed according to thelaw,thereby protecting the legitimate rights and interests ofhigh-qualityintellectualpropertyserviceinstitutions.TheTribunal has taken the lead in guiding the industry guidelines forintellect

131、ual property service institutions with the rules of case 40 adjudication,regulating the practices of patent agents,transferof licenses,and the transaction flow of technical achievements,and directing the healthy and orderly development of theintellectual property service industry.In the case of a pa

132、tentagency contract dispute between a science and technologycompany in Tianjin as well as between Wang and a patentagency in Tianjin,the patent agency was adjudicated to returnthe agency fees charged for the delayed patent application andthe poor quality of patent documents,thereby regulating thepat

133、ent agency market and promoting the improvement of thequality and efficiency of patent applications.(VII)Protect the legitimate rights and interests of theinnovation subjects,motivate the enthusiasm of all people ininvention and creationTechnology is the primary productive force,and talent isthe pri

134、mary resource.The Tribunal has fully leveraged theleading role of justice to protect the legitimate rights andinterests of innovation subjects,and has endeavored to create afavorable innovation atmosphere that respects knowledge andtalents,so as to contribute to building an important source ofindepe

135、ndent innovation and a source of original innovation inTianjin.The Tribunal has properly handled disputes involvingthe ownership of patents and rewards between enterprises anddeparting employees,and has adhered to the judicial philosophyof protecting both the technical achievements of high-tech 41 e

136、nterprises and the rights of departing employees to receiverewards,so as to fully inspire the innovation momentum ofmarket players.In the case of a dispute between Wu and ascienceandtechnologycompanyinTianjinovertheremuneration of the inventor of a job invention,the Tribunal,bymeans of repeated comm

137、unication,finally resolved the casethrough mediation,thereby protecting the right of the departingemployee as the inventor to receive remuneration rewards.Byjudicial adjudication,the disputes over the determination ofownership of scientific and technological achievements,transferof rights and distri

138、bution of benefits have been appropriatelyhandled in accordance with the law,so as to improve theutilization rate,realization rate and return rate of intellectualproperty rights and support the transformation and application ofscientificandtechnologicalachievementsaswellasindustrialization.In a seri

139、es of cases of disputes betweenIncocorr and a technology company over the ownership ofpatent rights,the Tribunal ruled that the patent rights andapplication rights were vested in the plaintiff,which effectivelyprotected the intellectual property rights of the enterprise andstimulated the innovation

140、power of the enterprises.In thedispute of Tianjin Automobile Mould Co.Ltd.against a scienceand technology company in Tianjin and a company in Hunan forinfringement of technical secrets,the Tribunal has penalized theillegal practices of departing employees stealing technical 42 secrets from the forme

141、r employer and protected the technicaladvantages of innovative subjects in the field of automobilemoulds.III.Innovative Mechanisms and Initiatives to UnleashNewMomentumfor QualityDevelopmentofJudicialServices(I)Construct a vertical and horizontal linkage platformto advance the protection of the over

142、all chain of intellectualproperty rights1.Construct the Beijing,Tianjin and Hebei intellectualproperty judicial protection collaboration mechanism.TheTianjin No.3 Intermediate Peoples Court has thoroughlyimplemented the strategic plan of the Twentieth CPC NationalCongress on promoting the coordinate

143、d development of Beijing,TianjinandHebeiaswellastherequirementsofcomprehensively strengthening the protection of intellectualproperty rights,and has signed the Framework Agreement onStrengthening Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rightsjointly with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court

144、and theXiongan Intermediate Peoples Court in Hebei,so as to create ajoint and collaborative platform for the protection of intellectualproperty rights in Beijing,Tianjin and Hebei,effectivelydevelop new channels and new paths for the coordinatedprotection of intellectual property rights in Beijing,T

145、ianjin andHebei,effectively promote the synergy and complementarity of 43 the courts of the three places in terms of talent training,judicialcoordination and joint research,and safeguard the high-qualitydevelopment of judicial protection of intellectual property rightsin Beijing,Tianjin and Hebei.2.

146、Construct a linkage mechanism between judicial andadministrativeenforcementofintellectualpropertyrights.Innovation driving is a systematic project,and the enhancementof the willingness of market players to innovate and invest ininnovation depends on a strict innovation protection system,which includ

147、es various aspects such as review and authorization,administrative enforcement and judicial protection.To furtherreinforce the overall chain protection of intellectual propertyrights,the Tianjin No.3 Intermediate Court,Tianjin Customs,the Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism,the MunicipalMarket S

148、upervision Commission and the Municipal IntellectualProperty Office have jointly signed the Linkage Mechanism ofJudicial and Administrative Law Enforcement of IntellectualProperty Rights,so as to build a linkage platform betweenjudicial and administrative law enforcement,coordinate the fourcollabora

149、tions of institutional mechanism,business field,talenttraining and Party building,and make concerted efforts to builda new pattern of collaborative protection of intellectual propertyrights.The Tianjin No.3 Central Court also established alinkage protection mechanism of justice and administration wi

150、ththe Tianjin Intellectual Property Protection Center,partnered 44 with the Binhai New Area Peoples Court and the Binhai NewArea Intellectual Property Office and the China(Binhai NewArea)Intellectual Property Protection Center in establishing acooperation mechanism of judicial protection and adminis

151、trativeprotection,and also established a collaboration mechanism withthe Tianjin Center for Patent Examination and Collaboration ofthe State Intellectual Property Office to improve the overallchain of creation,protection,application,management andservice,so as to provide robust support and strong pr

152、otection forinspiring innovation development,deepening the application ofintellectualpropertyrightsandbuildingahighlandofintellectual property protection.3.Construct a collaborative mechanism for intellectualproperty protection between the judicial authorities and highereducation institutions.The Mu

153、nicipal Party Committee andMunicipalGovernmenthaveexplicitlyproposedTenInitiatives to upgrade the city with education and talent.Tofullyunleashtheintellectualresourcesofcollegesanduniversities as well as the new momentum of judicial protection,Tianjin No.3 Intermediate Peoples Court has signed theCo

154、llaborative Mechanism of Intellectual Property Protectionwith Tianjin University of Science and Technology and BinhaiNewAreaPeoplesCourtforbuildingaplatformfortheoretical-practical innovation transformation of intellectualproperty protection as well as opening up the integration 45 channelbetweenint

155、ellectualresourcesofcollegesanduniversities and judicial protection of courts.Both parties willstrengthen the collaboration in fields such as selection andrecruitment of technical investigation officers,expert pool ofintellectual property,legal internship mechanism,academicseminars and exchanges,tra

156、ining of intellectual property talentsand joint construction of the Party,so as to solidly promotetheoretical research and transformation of achievements inintellectual property protection and jointly improve the level ofjudicial trial of intellectual property as well as the quality oftraining of ta

157、lents in colleges and universities.(II)Continue to improve the mechanism for handlingcases and optimize the quality and efficiency indicators ofintellectual property trials1.The three-in-one trial mechanism has been functioningeffectively.The Tribunal has intensified efforts in criminalcrackdown,and

158、 rigorously punished crimes with obviouscriminal deterrent effects The Tribunal has actively implementedthe criminal policy of balanced leniency and severity,fiercelycombatingcrimesagainstinnovationandcreativity,andachieving effective protection of key core technologies ofhigh-tech enterprises while

159、 combating crimes.The Tribunal haspublicly tried the case of infringement of trade secrets by Zhaoand pronounced the verdict in court,the defendant confessed tothe crime and expressed obedience to the verdict without appeal,46 the case was the first case to determine the amount of loss byreasonable

160、license fee following the implementation of theInterpretations of the Supreme Peoples Court and the SupremePeoples Procuratorate on the Specific Application of Law inCriminal Cases of Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights(III),andrespondedtothepracticalproblemsofthelong-standing judicial prac

161、tice of simple acquisition typeinfringement of trade secrets,and has provided an example forthe public,prosecution,law and other judicial organs to dealwith related criminal matters,and also provided a vivid teachingmaterial for the pioneering application of the law.The Tribunalhas properly tried ad

162、ministrative cases and promoted theunification of administrative and judicial standards.Over thepast four years,the Tribunal has closed a total of fivetechnology-based intellectual property administrative cases,involving specific administrative acts covering various aspectssuch as technology secrets

163、 and patent infringement.In the trialof administrative cases,the main responsible officials ofadministrative organs appeared in court,related administrativeorgans attended the trial,and the news media reported on thetrial activities.By trying administrative cases,the Tribunal hasactively performed i

164、ts judicial review function,supervised andregulated administrative law enforcement,and proactivelyguided the enforcement agencies of intellectual property rightsto harmonize their processing standards of investigation and 47 evidencecollection,evidencereview,infringementdetermination and liability a

165、ssumption with judicial standards.2.The system for identifying diversified technical facts hascontinued to improve.Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal,asthe centralized jurisdictional tribunal for technological cases inTianjin,accepts cases involving multiple scientific and technicaldisciplines,a

166、nd it has become a key and difficult task to identifythe technical facts in an objective,scientific and unbiasedmanner.TheTribunalhaspioneeredtheinter-domesticdeployment of technical investigation officials,and applied totheNationalCourt TechnicalInvestigationTalentPoolthrough the National Court Tec

167、hnical Investigation TalentSharing Mechanism for off-site deployment of technicalinvestigation officials from the Supreme Court.Tianjin No.3Intermediate Court has signed the Framework Agreement onCooperation in Intellectual Property Rights with the TianjinCenter for Patent Examination and Collaborat

168、ion of the StateIntellectual Property Office,and the Collaborative MechanismforIntellectualPropertyRightsProtectionwithTianjinUniversity of Science and Technology,to employ technicalinvestigation officers to participate in the identification oftechnical facts of the case.The Court has also formulate

169、d theRules for Participation of Technical Investigation Officers inLitigation Activities and participated in the compilation of theWork Manual for Technical Investigation Officers of the 48 Supreme Court to improve the rules and regulations.Up topresent,a total of 32 technical investigation official

170、s have beenselected and engaged,with over 110 person-time participation oftechnical investigation officials in cases involving patents,technology secrets,integrated circuit layout,computer software,etc.,to complete the identification of technical facts with highquality and efficiency.Currently,the t

171、echnical investigationofficial system has been operating in a standardized manner withsmooth flow of supplements,making it a Tianjin modelavailable nationwide in terms of improving the quality andefficiency of trials of intellectual property cases through a soundand diversified technical fact identi

172、fication mechanism.3.Effective application of innovative judicial reforminitiatives.Explore the professional trial model.The Court hasestablished a trial team for technological cases to refine the trialsand make precise decisions.It has focused on the overallprocess of each case from trial,paperwork

173、 to cases and researchso as to guarantee the availability of high-quality cases withsignificant impact.Address dilemma of proof with proper legalmeans.The Tribunal has adopted the rules of evidence to timelypresent the basic list of evidence to both parties;intensified theefforts to acquire evidence

174、 on application,and promptlyinvestigated and collected evidence in cases where the partiescould not obtain it or where the risk of obtaining the evidencewashigh.Furthermore,ithasextensivelyappliedthe 49 investigation orders of lawyers and assisted in the investigationletters to efficiently and conve

175、niently investigate the importantfacts of the cases,and endeavored to crack the problem ofdifficulty in providing evidence in intellectual property rightsprotection,andnotarizedtheefficientprotectionofthelegitimate rights and interests of the right holders.Make the bestuse of multi-discipline mechan

176、ism.The Tribunal has activelystrengthened the cooperation with the Municipal IntellectualProperty Protection Center and the Binhai Intellectual PropertyProtection Center,and commissioned the two Protection Centersto mediate technical cases as invited mediation organizations.Since the establishment o

177、f the cooperation mechanism,theTribunal has commissioned over 200 technological cases formediation,withsatisfactoryresults.Furtherpromotetheconstruction of intelligent court.The Tribunal has adhered toprotectinginnovationwithinnovativetechnology,fullyleveraged the Smart Court platform,further advanc

178、ed onlinecourt hearings,formulated online court trial protocols,andprovided rule support for online court trials.In view of thedifficult and complicated technological cases,the Tribunal hasexplored a path of online decomposition and comparison oftechnical features,with objective and realistic visual

179、 effects andstable and reliable operation,thereby greatly facilitating thelitigation of the parties,resulting in high praise from the parties.(III)Focus on innovation and development demands,50 strengthen the function of judicial protection of scientificand technological innovation1.Focus on the tra

180、nsformation of findings,and proposerecommendations for the general situation of science andtechnology innovation and development.The Tribunal hasconsistently focused on strategic and realistic major mattersconcerning the innovative development of Tianjin to launchresearch,and transformed the researc

181、h results into effectiveservices for the overall situation,and provided decision-makingreference for the development of science and technologyinnovation in Tianjin.The Tribunal has submitted the Researchon Serving and Ensuring the Construction of a CompetitiveIntellectual Property City in Tianjin by

182、 Tianjin IntellectualProperty Tribunal to the General Office of the Municipal PartyCommittee,whichsummarizedtheachievementsandexperiences in terms of the strategy of high-quality cases,creation of an innovative environment and construction of alarge protection pattern,analyzed in depth the existing

183、problemsand proposed solutions thereof.The Tribunal has submitted areport entitled Four Aspects of Problems Restricting theDevelopment of Science and Technology-based Enterprises inTianjin,which analyzed in depth the characteristics of the casesand their causes and recommendations,in conjunction wit

184、h thecharacteristics of the technology-based cases tried.It hassubmitted a report entitled Four Aspects of Problems Restricting 51 the Development of Intelligent Manufacturing Industry inComputer Software,which analyzed the problems,identified thecauses and proposed countermeasures from the cases tr

185、iedaround the intelligent software industry.Furthermore,theTribunal has fully leveraged the role of judicial advice anddelivered4judicialrecommendationstoadministrativeauthorities and science and innovation enterprises to seize thecutting-edge opportunities,cure the problems before they occurandprom

186、otetheimprovementofsocialgovernance.Participate actively in the development and improvement ofrules and regulations.In the formulation of the Regulations onthe Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Tianjin,theCourt hosted a symposium on the court system in the city,andproposed five principle

187、 recommendations based on judicialpractice experience,such as highlighting the characteristics ofTianjin,as well as 24 specific recommendations,such asdeepening diversified dispute resolution and strengthening thepunishment for infringement of trade secrets and repeatedinfringement,all of which have

188、 been adopted by the StandingCommittee of the Municipal Peoples Congress.2.Advance the forward movement of litigation services,and precisely respond to the judicial demands of science andtechnology-based enterprises.The Binhai New Area,as one ofthe first national high-tech zones and the National Ind

189、ependentInnovation Demonstration Zone,has pooled a large number of 52 science and innovation industries and high-tech resources acrossthe city.The Tribunal has taken the initiative to the interfacingof the judicial trial services with major policies such as thehigh-quality development of the Binhai

190、New Area and thereform trials of the Free Trade Zone,to launch in-depth andextensive research and study,and to continuously improve theforesight,precision and effectiveness of judicial services.In2022,on the occasion of the third anniversary of GeneralSecretary Xi Jinpings visit to Binhai-Zhongguanc

191、un ScienceandTechnologyPark,theTribunalpaidavisittoBinhai-Zhongguancun Science and Technology Park to surveythe demands for intellectual property protection of high-techenterprises in the park,such as intelligent technology industry,life and health industry,new energy and new materials industry,and

192、to explain the procedures for patent application,precautions,ways to maintain rights and protection of technical secrets,so asto address the demands for intellectual property protection inkey industries and key technologies.In response to the problemsconcerning the lack of legal awareness of certain

193、 enterprises,theTribunal has launched a general publicity campaign related tothe transformation of scientific research results,raised theawareness level of scientific research institutions and scientificresearchers on related laws,consolidated the foundation of therights of the transformation of sci

194、entific research results,andprovided early warning of intellectual property risks for 53 enterprises to reduce the risks of litigation.The Tribunal has alsoorganized visits to pharmaceutical company CanSino BiologicsInc.,artificial intelligence company Iflytek,new manufacturingcompany TBEA Transform

195、er Co.,Ltd.as well as other keyscience and technology enterprises under the jurisdiction of theCourt to launch research visits,actively listen to the judicialdemands of enterprises on the protection of intellectual propertyrights of core technologies,clarify the working philosophy,provide better ser

196、vices for the development of science andtechnology-basedenterprises,andservetoprotectthehigh-quality development of Binhai New Area demonstrationleading.(IV)Expandthepopularizationoflawpublicitypositions,planting the atmosphere of public opinion toprotect intellectual property rights1.Multi-field ju

197、dicial publicity.Over the past four years,the Tribunal has always attached great importance to publicityefforts and continued to spread the strongest voice of judicialprotection of intellectual property rights in Tianjin.It hasconvened press conferences for three consecutive years,releasedthree whit

198、e papers on intellectual property protection and 20typical cases,and disclosed the status of intellectual propertyprotectionandtheachievementsofservingscienceandtechnology innovation in a timely manner.It has fully leveragedthe advantages of the news media in creating a multimedia 54 integration to

199、promote,online and offline synergy propagandamatrix.It has actively engaged in the promotion of law,and wasinvited to cooperate with Tianjin TV to produce a promotionalfilm on innovation and development of intellectual propertyjudicial services,which was broadcasted on News Channel,Science and Educa

200、tion Channel of Tianjin TV and TianjinTraffic Radio Channel for many times.It has extensivelylaunched training on laws,and has been invited to TianjinIntellectual Property Office,the Tianjin Center of the StatePatent Office Examination and Collaboration,the MarketSupervision Commission,enterprises a

201、nd schools in the districtto deliver training lectures on patent knowledge and popularizepatent laws.Furthermore,it has organized high quality onlinelegal literacy lectures and regularly published legal literacyvideos on new media platforms such as TikTok,WeChat officalaccount,etc.,with lively conte

202、nts and forms to fully inform andpresent the results of intellectual property protection to thepublic.2.Comprehensive judicial disclosure.The Tribunal hasalways adhered to the concept of legal literacy for the judiciary,taking judicial openness as a position for legal literacy andactively reporting

203、to the public on the trial activities of theTribunal.The Tribunal has made efforts to build the judicialdisclosure brands of“Tianjin Intellectual Property TribunalNewsletter”and“Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal Trials”,55 andmade efforts to build the judicial disclosure brands ofTianjin Intell

204、ectual Property Tribunal Newsletter and TianjinIntelligent Property Trials,and has made timely and accuratedisclosure of dynamics of tribunal operations,typical cases,lawsandregulationsthroughtheplatformofTianjinIntellectual Property Tribunal Newsletter.It has publisheddozens of reports on the work

205、of the tribunal on influentialmedia platforms such as the Legal Daily,the Peoples CourtNewspaper and the Tianjin Daily,highlighting the highlandeffect of judicial protection of intellectual property.The Tribunalhas employed the platform of Tianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunal Trials to organize a s

206、eries of trial observation byselecting typical cases and actively inviting NPC representatives,CPPCC members,special supervisors and media reporters toobserve on site,so as to turn each typical case into a vivid ruleof law public class and continuously enhance the nationalawareness of respecting and

207、 protecting innovation,and strive tocreate a first-class innovation ecology.IV.Strengthen team building,enhance the level ofprotection and innovation development capacitiesTalent is a major strategy for the development of thecountry,and team building is the foundation and guarantee forthe constructi

208、on of a national first-class intellectual propertytribunal.Over the past four years,the Tribunal has attachedgreat importance to team building,established a team of 56 intellectual property judges with strong political conviction andprofessional quality,and cultivated a number of advancedindividuals

209、.The Tribunal has been awarded as the ModelCollective of Tianjin Court System,and the Party building brandTianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal Pioneer has beenawarded as the Pioneering Team of Party Members.Onemember of the Tribunal has been awarded Satisfactory Politicaland Legal Officer of Tianj

210、in Political and Legal System by theGeneral Public,one member of the Tribunal has been awardedThe Most Beautiful Family of Tianjin,one member of theTribunal has been awarded Second-class Merit,one member ofthe Tribunal has been awarded Third-class Merit,eight membersof the Party have been awarded Ou

211、tstanding Communist PartyMember,one member of the Party has been awarded PioneerPost,and one member of the Party has been awarded ModelParty Member in Services(I)Strengthen the foundation and concentrate onpolitical capacity buildingOver the past four years,the Tribunal has always adheredto the abso

212、lute leadership of the Party in political and legalaffairs,thoroughly studied and understood the spirits of theNineteenthPartyCongress,thePlenarySessionsoftheNineteenth National Congress and the Twentieth Party Congress,firmly defended the Two Establishments and resolutelyrealized the Two Maintainme

213、nts.The Tribunal has been taking 57 Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristicsfor a New Era as the guidance,conscientiously implementing XiJinping Thought on Rule of Law,thoroughly implementing theimportant instructions and directions of General Secretary XiJinping on political and

214、 legal affairs as well as the spirit ofimportant discourse on intellectual property protection,andsolidly undertaking various tasks around the general situation ofservinginnovationanddevelopment.TheTribunalhascomprehensively and accurately implemented the decisions andplans of the Central Committee

215、and the Municipal Committeeon strengthening intellectual property protection and scientificand technological innovation,and has continuously incorporatedthe innovative theories of the Party with the intellectual propertytrials in an in-depth manner.The Tribunal has established theParty building bran

216、d matrix of“Tianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunalPioneer,TianjinIntellectualPropertyTribunalNewsletter,Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal Lecturesand Tianjin Intellectual Property Tribunal Trials,furtherstrengthened the characteristic concepts of Party buildingleading,integration and services,pr

217、omoted branch activitieswith distinctive features and highlights,actively guided youngpolice officials to be pioneers and exemplary in learning,practicing and understanding,taking up important tasks andstrivingforperformance,continuouslyimprovedthecomprehensive competence of young police officials,a

218、nd 58 continuously enhanced the centripetal force and cohesion of theParty branch.(II)Improve quality and efficiency,reinforce businesscapacity enhancementThe trial of intellectual property rights features a highdegreeoftechnicality,complexity,professionalismandinternationalism,and the trial of inte

219、llectual property rightsrequires proficiency in law,familiarity with technology,nationalconditions,and the global outlook.Over the past four years,the Tribunal has taken the Expert Judge program as a platformto further promote the implementation of the high-qualitystrategy.Based on the platform of T

220、ianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunal Lectures,the Tribunal has regularly launched lecturesand seminars on policies and regulations,core patents,newplant varieties,high-level integrated circuit layout designs andother hot topics at the forefront of intellectual property rightsand difficult issues in

221、judicial practice,so as to unleash thepowerful momentum of research and learning interaction.TheCompany has proactively reinforced external learning andexchanges,assigned trial officials to engage in exchangeseminarsontradesecretswiththeMarketSupervisionCommission,exchange seminars on blockchain dat

222、a depositionplatform with the Intellectual Property Office of Nankai District,and participated in seminars on difficult issues related to opensource software litigation organized by the Supreme Court,so as 59 to continuously enhance its participation and contribution tosolving the frontier and diffi

223、cult issues related to intellectualproperty.TheTribunalhasactivelyparticipatedintheformulation and improvement of normative documents,andprovided suggestions for the revision of normative documentssuch as the Several Provisions on Evidence in IntellectualProperty Civil Litigation of the Supreme Cour

224、t and the Opinionson the Application of Punitive Damages in Intellectual PropertyInfringement Cases of the Tianjin Supreme Court,with manysuggestions being adopted by higher courts.The Tribunal hasachieved fruitful research results,with two members awardedtheExcellentPrizeofthe31stNationalCourtSyste

225、mColloquium,one member publishing an article in the nationalcore journal Application of Law,one member awarded theExcellent Key Research Topic of Tianjin Court System,onemember receiving the Excellent Prize of the 2020 Tianjin CourtColloquium,one member receiving the Third Prize of the EssayoftheThi

226、rdBeijing-Tianjin-HebeiJudicialForum,twomembers awarded the Excellent Prize of the Essay of theEleventh Beijing-Tianjin-Shanghai-Chongqing Judicial Forum,two members awarded the Second Prize,one member awardedthe Third Prize and two members awarded the Excellent Prize ofthe Tianjin University-China

227、Judicial Forum of the ChineseSocietyofBehavioralLaw.Withhigh-qualitycasescontinuously emerging,a number of cases of the Tribunal have 60 beenawarded50 TypicalCasesofIntellectualPropertyProtection by the Supreme Peoples Court,Top Ten InfluentialCases of Tianjin Courts,Typical Cases of Tianjin Courts

228、Servingand Guaranteeing the Construction of One Belt and One Road,Typical Cases of Judicial Protection of Intellectual PropertyRights in Tianjin,etc.A number of court trials have beenawarded the First Prize of Excellent Court Trial of TianjinMunicipal Court,and a number of instruments have beenaward

229、ed the First,Second and Third Prizes of ExcellentInstrument Achievementof TianjinMunicipalCourtandExcellent Instrument of the Municipal Court,representing aremarkable performance of the Excellence Project.61 ConclusionIt was pointed out at the Twentieth CPC National Congressthat science and technolo

230、gy is the primary productive force,talent is the primary resource,and innovation is the primarydriving force.Nowadays,the world is undergoing a great changeunprecedented in a century,and China is in a critical period ofachieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.Theinnovation-driven devel

231、opment strategy is being implemented inan in-depth manner,and it is the prominent theme of technicalintellectual property trials to serve and ensure innovationdevelopment and scientific and technological self-reliance andself-improvement.The creativity of intellectual property rightsis developing by

232、 leaps and bounds.In the face of new industries,new fields and new problems in the judicial protection ofintellectual property rights,the Tianjin Intellectual PropertyTribunal will consistently adhere to the guidance of Xi JinpingsThought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a NewEra,focuso

233、nthenationalstrategicdemandsandthedevelopment needs of Tianjin,closely concentrate on the themeofhigh-qualitydevelopment,thoroughly,accuratelyandcomprehensively implement the new development concept,closely focus on the theme of high-quality development,implement the new development concept in a com

234、plete,accurateand comprehensive manner,concentrate on the implementation 62 of the Ten Initiatives of the Municipal Party Committee andthe Municipal Government,improve the quality and efficiencyof the judiciary,maintain the innovative power,with newinitiatives,newmechanisms,newservices,powerfullysaf

235、eguard the innovation-driven development of Tianjin and thecomprehensive construction of a socialist modern metropolis.63 技術類典型案例（2022.4-2023.4）貝比贊公司訴一達通公司、新速度公司、小貴族公司侵害發明專利權糾紛案【案情摘要】本案原告貝比贊公司（BABYZEN）系法國著名童車生產商，旗下擁有多項國際知名童車品牌，在業內享有很高知名度。其享有名稱為“可折疊的嬰兒車”發明專利。小貴族公司未經許可制造侵犯貝比贊公司上述專利權的童車產品，新速度公司通過一達通公司將

236、涉案被訴侵權產品售往境外。原告請求法院判令上述被告立即停止實施侵權行為；銷毀庫存及海關扣押的侵權產品；判令被告一達通公司、新速度公司賠償原告貝比贊公司經濟損失及合理費用共計 50 萬元；判令被告小貴族公司賠償原告貝比贊公司經濟損失 150 萬元，并對被告一達通公司、新速度公司的賠償數額承擔連帶責任?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，本案被告小貴族公司在應知其所制造童車為侵權產品的情況下，仍未停止侵權，依然大量制造并銷售侵權產品，侵權惡意明顯。同時，其制造、銷售侵權產品規模巨大，僅單筆交易多達近兩千臺，銷售市場遍及國內外，侵權情節極其嚴重。綜合考慮本案侵權情節及相關證據的基礎 64 上，認定被告小貴族公司承

237、擔原告損失三倍的懲罰性賠償金額。新速度公司實施了許諾銷售、銷售侵犯原告貝比贊公司專利權的行為。故判決新速度公司立即停止許諾銷售、銷售侵犯貝比贊公司發明專利權的童車；小貴族公司立即停止制造、銷售侵犯貝比贊公司發明專利權的童車；新速度公司賠償貝比贊公司經濟損失及合理開支 10 萬元；小貴族公司賠償貝比贊公司經濟損失 150 萬元?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系全國首例適用懲罰性賠償的涉外專利侵權案，將倡導已久的懲罰性賠償司法政策率先成功運用到知識產權司法實踐中，明確了懲罰性賠償適用的裁判要旨，在懲罰性賠償裁判規則適用條件和數額計算方面具有典型示范意義，參評天津市示范優案。黨的二十大明確提出創新在我國現代化建設

238、全局中的核心地位。保護知識產權就是保護創新。本案的審理，既彰顯了嚴厲打擊惡意侵權的司法態度和加強知識產權司法保護的堅定決心，也是積極貫徹中央提出的“嚴大快同”知識產權司法保護理念的生動實踐?！皣馈北Ｗo，作為首例適用懲罰性賠償的涉外專利侵權知識產權案件，體現出嚴格保護創新的司法理念，同時對惡意侵權行為形成有力震懾?！按蟆北Ｗo，本案利用法院和國家專利局的合作機制，有專利審查員作為技術調查官參與技術事實查明，同時在事實認定當中充分考慮了知識產權行政執法機關行政處罰的預決效力?！翱臁北Ｗo，在極短時間內完成物證提取、現場勘驗、組織聽證等程序，作出全國首例在發明專利侵權 65 案件中涉及海關的行為保全裁定

239、?！巴北Ｗo，本案堅持依法平等保護中外高新技術企業合法權益，維護科技創新企業核心競爭力，營造良好的市場化法治化國際化營商環境和優質的跨國投資環境。66 魯研公司訴金瑞豐公司侵害植物新品種權糾紛案【案情摘要】魯研公司系“濟麥 22”小麥品種權的獨占被許可人。2020年天津市寶坻區農業農村委員會綜合行政執法支隊對天津市寶坻區某農資經營部以“濟麥 22”麥種冒充“輪選 310”麥種進行銷售假種子的行為作出行政處罰。魯研農業公司認為該農資經營部（已注銷）的經營者尚某某銷售的種子實際為“濟麥 22”，該批種子系尚某某從金瑞豐公司購進，故起訴金瑞豐公司未經許可擅自生產、銷售“濟麥 22”品種構成侵權。為充

240、分查明案件事實，法院走訪有關行政執法機關，調取了相關卷宗，結合各方證據，還原了金瑞豐公司與尚某某的交易過程。涉案種子系金瑞豐公司生產、銷售，經 DNA 指紋譜帶數據檢測，涉案種子與“濟麥 22”品種構成相似，金瑞豐公司未提供相反證據證明被訴侵權種子與授權品種不同?！静门薪Y果】在充分查清案件事實的基礎上，經過法院的調解，金瑞豐公司對其行為的性質和后果有了明確的認識，認可對魯研公司所造成的損失。最終，魯研公司與金瑞豐公司握手言和并就進一步的合作達成協議。本案以撤回起訴的方式結案?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案是我市首例侵害植物新品種權糾紛案。種子是農業的“芯片”，種業知識產權保護不僅事關國家糧食安全，也是全面推

241、行鄉村振興戰略的要求。該案涉及種子套牌行為，67 是一起典型的侵犯品種權案件。法院準確查清案件事實，合理分配舉證責任，促使侵權人認清其行為性質并認可給對方造成的損失。通過調解，法院快速高效化解了雙方矛盾，充分保障了植物新品種權利人的合法權益。調解工作還促成了雙方關于該植物新品種的進一步商業合作，使雙方實現互利共贏，并規范了種業知識產權秩序，該案取得了良好的社會效果。68 潘某訴王某等侵害外觀設計專利權糾紛案【案情摘要】原告潘某是“餐邊柜（日式）”的外觀設計專利權人。被告王某在淘寶網電商平臺上銷售涉嫌使用涉案外觀設計方案制造的產品，原告對相關銷售行為進行了公證取證。原告認為被告制造、銷售、許諾銷

242、售涉案產品構成專利侵權，要求停止侵權并賠償損失。被告抗辯其生產家具的設計方案為現有設計，并對涉案專利向國家知識產權局提出了專利無效宣告請求。案件審理過程中，法院委托天津市知識產權保護中心人民調解委員會（以下簡稱調委會）對本案進行調解。調委會組成合議組，實地走訪核實相關情況，就案件事實情況與雙方當事人進行充分溝通，并為雙方答疑解惑?！静门薪Y果】法院與調委會積極與雙方當事人進行溝通，采取重點突破原則，提供多種調解方案，最終促成雙方和解，原告撤回起訴。結案后，調委會及時回訪雙方當事人，為企業加強知識產權保護建言獻策，有效提升了多元化解糾紛實效?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案是我市利用多元化糾紛解決機制化解知識產權

243、糾紛的典型案例。該案屬于專利侵權糾紛，專業性較強。法院利用調委會所具有的專業優勢，并充分運用多元解紛機制，促成雙方和解。本案的快速調解暢通了訴調對接渠道，為專利權人提供了更加高效、便捷、低成本的保護途徑，也為快速化解復雜技術糾紛提供了借鑒思路。69 斯瑞爾公司與凱英公司、齊信公司濫用市場支配地位糾紛案【案情摘要】斯瑞爾公司系生產三氯化鐵溶液的公司，齊信公司受凱英公司委托，對某污泥處理廠三氯化鐵采購項目進行招標，由于二次招標報名均不足三家，該項目采購方式轉為競爭性談判，斯瑞爾公司參與上述項目的招標及競爭性談判但未中標。斯瑞爾公司主張凱英公司在天津污水污泥行業具有市場支配地位，凱英公司和齊信公司在

244、競爭性談判文件中對本地企業和外地企業設置不同條件，要求外地企業提供三氯化鐵場地房產證或場地租賃合同、天津市范圍內設有辦事處或分公司的有效證明以及提供至少兩輛符合談判文件要求的運輸車輛等條件屬于以不合理的條件限制或者排斥潛在投標人，構成濫用市場支配地位行為，斯瑞爾公司提起訴訟要求凱英公司、齊信公司停止侵權并賠償斯瑞爾公司的相應損失?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，斯瑞爾公司主張凱英公司的行為構成濫用市場支配地位行為，需在界定本案相關市場的基礎上，對凱英公司是否具有市場支配地位以及是否存在濫用行為等進行分析。關于相關市場的界定，本案中，結合雙方發生爭議的主要事實和原因以及凱英公司的經營行為，本案的相關市場應

245、界定為天津污水污泥處理行業。關于凱英公司是否具有本案相關市場支配地位，應結合經營者的市場份額、相關市場競爭狀況、經營者控制市場上下游的能力、其他經營者的依 70 賴程度及其他經營者參與相關市場的難易程度等因素進行綜合考慮，并且應由斯瑞爾公司對此負有舉證責任，但斯瑞爾公司并未提交充足證據。關于凱英公司是否存在濫用市場支配地位的行為，涉案項目為三氯化鐵采購，凱英公司針對三氯化鐵系危險化學品的特殊性質、企業日常生產經營需要等因素，有權設置條件來滿足項目需求，且設置的條件未違反相應法律、法規的規定，故法院經審理駁回斯瑞爾公司的訴訟請求?！镜湫鸵饬x】該案系涉及招投標領域濫用市場支配地位壟斷糾紛的典型案例

246、，在進一步厘清濫用市場支配地位糾紛司法審查認定標準以及如何兼顧維護正常市場競爭秩序和保護市場主體自主經營權方面具有典型意義。近年來，國家出臺了一系列法律、法規及相關行業規范，持續打擊壟斷經營行為，保護行業競爭秩序，但對于市場主體的自主經營權也要進行依法保護。本案中，法院一方面認為根據現有證據無法證明凱英公司在相關市場內具有支配地位，另一方面法院亦認為，市場主體在招投標或競爭性談判中也有權根據項目特殊需求（本案涉及危險化學品采購）在法律法規規定的范圍內設置相應條件，保護了企業的自主經營權。該案一審宣判后，當事人均未上訴，案件處理效果良好。71 佳潔斯公司與美心經營部,羅福門窗廠侵害實用新型專利權

247、糾紛案【案情摘要】原告佳潔斯公司擁有一項名為“平開推拉門窗轉換裝置”的實用新型專利，原告認為，由被告羅福門窗廠生產、美心經營部銷售的涉案被訴侵權產品落入涉案專利保護范圍。該案前期經過了行政裁決程序，知識產權行政執法部門經現場調查，根據“整體觀察、綜合判斷”原則，作出行政裁決，認定涉案被訴侵權產品落入涉案專利權的保護范圍，并責令涉案經營部停止銷售涉案被訴侵權產品。原告以行政裁決書作為主要證據，提起本案民事訴訟?！静门薪Y果】法院向知識產權行政執法部門調取了涉案行政裁決的現場執法錄像。涉案行政裁決書及相應的現場執法錄像以及美心經營部銷售現場照片，均不能完整體現涉案被訴侵權產品所包含的技術方案及具體的

248、技術特征，無法實現技術特征劃分，并與涉案專利技術方案對比，無法判定被訴侵權產品所采用的技術方案是否落入涉案專利權的保護范圍，故對原告訴請未予支持?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系一起涉及知產侵權糾紛行政裁決程序與司法審判程序獨立價值的典型案例，在如何取證及保存證據方面具有典型意義。該案反映了現有知產行政保護與司法保護體系中的共性問題，即已有行政裁決結論在民事審判程序中如何 72 定性。知識產權民事審判與行政裁決有各自獨立的程序價值，民事審判中判定實用新型專利侵權的成立與否，應對涉案侵權行為進行全面審查，要將專利技術方案和被訴侵權技術方案進行分解，進而對比技術特征。已有的行政裁決結論應作為證據使用，而非直接依

249、據行政裁決結論作出定性。本案處理結果為此提供了司法審判路徑，也為如何更好發揮行政、司法對于知識產權協同保護作用提供了思考與探索。73 歐卡姆公司與惠齊公司侵害外觀設計專利權糾紛【案情摘要】原告歐卡姆公司為外觀設計專利權人，該專利所應用的產品為電纜分線器產品。原告在本案中主張，曾與其商討購買其電纜分線器產品的被告惠齊公司售賣的電纜分線器產品，與權利外觀設計專利構成實質性相同?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，原告所主張的涉案專利權處于合法有效的狀態。本案中被訴侵權產品與涉案專利均為電纜分支連接器，屬于相同種類產品。從一般消費者的角度判斷，被訴侵權產品與涉案專利在端部肋形狀、端部形狀存在較大差異，且端部肋形狀

250、和端部形狀的設計空間較大，故被訴侵權產品與涉案專利既不相同也不等同。因被訴侵權產品的外觀設計未落入涉案專利保護范圍，故原告的其他訴訟請求亦無法支持。綜上，依法駁回原告西安歐卡姆電氣有限公司的全部訴訟請求?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系侵害外觀設計專利權糾紛中，涉及“一般消費者”擬制的典型案例，明確了如何依照專利法及其司法解釋的相關規定，在原告主張的外觀設計專利與被訴侵權產品均為相關專業領域工作人員才具備觀察條件的情形下，如何在案件中界定“一般消費者”，以及界定“一般消費者”的方式方法。具體為：在原告所主張的權利外觀設計與被訴侵權設計的受眾均為特定領域的從業者時，應將“一般消費者”進行 74 適當的界定。該

251、種界定不宜將其限定為“從事某某工作”或者“從事某某行業”的具體工作人員，而應當結合最高人民法院關于審理侵犯專利權糾紛案件應用法律若干問題的解釋規定中的“知識水平”和“認知能力”兩方面來進行界定，即權利外觀設計與被訴侵權設計的受眾對上述設計具備怎樣的知識水平，其認知能力需達到何種程度，才足以使其能夠辨別出權利設計與被訴侵權設計是否存在實質性區別。75 明谷公司與信茂公司計算機軟件開發合同糾紛案【案情摘要】明谷公司與信茂公司訂立軟件開發合同約定，明谷公司為信茂公司開發涉案軟件系統。信茂公司依約支付了預付款。后在合同履行中，雙方對于交付的軟件是否符合驗收標準、能否上線運行產生爭議。信茂公司未支付剩余

252、款項。明谷公司起訴要求信茂公司支付軟件開發的剩余價款及違約金。訴訟中，信茂公司提起反訴，要求明谷公司返還預付款、支付違約金，并在反訴狀中提出解除雙方之間軟件開發合同?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，涉案軟件開發合同合法有效，對雙方當事人均具有法律約束力，雙方均應全面履行合同義務。鑒于雙方當事人對軟件“開發周期”存在不同理解，結合涉案合同其他條款、合同目的、交易習慣等因素，對計算機軟件“開發周期”應解釋為：自明谷公司收到合同約定的預付款起到軟件驗收合格。明谷公司雖交付軟件產品及相關操作文檔，但并未經驗收合格，故不符合“開發周期”的約定。同時，信茂公司亦未按照涉案合同約定支付對應款項，也存在違約行為?？紤]到

253、雙方均構成違約，且繼續履行合同已難以實現合同目的，認定涉案合同已解除。雖然明谷公司交付的軟件不符合約定，但其已實際進行了軟件開發并交付了初步成果，為履行合同投入了人力和資金，結合合同性質和履行情況，信茂公司向明谷公司支付的預付款不予返還。同時，因涉案 76 合同已被信茂公司解除，信茂公司要求明谷公司支付逾期履約違約金不符合合同法有關合同解除后果的規定?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案涉及對計算機軟件開發合同中有關“開發周期”等術語的解釋，在認定軟件開發成果是否符合約定及軟件開發合同解除標準方面具有典型意義。本案中，技術調查官參與訴訟，協助查明軟件專業方面的技術事實，其提供的有關軟件行業對術語的通常理解為案件審

254、理提供重要參考。在計算機軟件開發合同糾紛中，涉案軟件是否符合約定的驗收標準是案件審理的關鍵。通常情況下，一方起訴認為未達到驗收標準，繼而要求解除合同，對于未達到驗收標準是否構成合同解除的條件需綜合考慮。本案結合當事人使用狀況、陳述及法庭當庭勘驗等方式認定涉案軟件未經驗收合格，且涉案軟件開發目的在于應對疫情防控給餐飲業帶來的沖擊，遲延交付已錯失商機，故合同目的不能實現。結合雙方均存在違約行為的情形，認定涉案合同已解除?？紤]到軟件作為合同標的物的特殊性，無法適用恢復原狀，且一方交付的軟件雖不符合約定，但其已實際進行了軟件開發并交付了初步成果，為履行合同投入了人力和資金，故損失由雙方分擔。77 達瑞

255、公司與創遠公司侵害外觀設計專利權糾紛案【案情摘要】達瑞公司被授予一種名稱為“蛋糕裝飾巧克力飾品（鄰家女孩）”的外觀設計專利權，該外觀設計專利證書簡要說明載明：本外觀設計產品的用途為巧克力制品，蛋糕、甜品等食品裝飾，或單獨使用，并用于食用和觀賞；設計要點在于產品的形狀和圖案的結合；最能表明設計要點的圖片或照片為主視圖。該專利處于有效期內。在相關展會舉辦期間，達瑞公司委托代理人在創遠公司設置展臺處公證購買了展品圖冊，并當場取得宣傳頁、紙袋和銷售小票等。后在創遠公司經營場所，達瑞公司委托代理人公證購買了被訴侵權產品（蛋糕模具）。達瑞公司認為創遠公司制造、銷售和許諾銷售的被訴侵權產品（蛋糕模具）的設計

256、特征落入涉案外觀設計專利權保護范圍，要求創遠公司停止侵權并予以賠償?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，涉案外觀設計專利處于有效期內，且權利穩定，創遠公司有關涉案專利外觀設計喪失新穎性的抗辯不能成立。涉案外觀設計專利產品用途為蛋糕裝飾巧克力飾品，可食用、可觀賞。被訴侵權設計產品系置于蛋糕上的裝飾品模型，不可食用。經綜合考量，兩者屬于相近種類產品，可以進行比對。經比對，被訴侵權設計落入涉案外觀設計專利權的保護范圍。創遠公司未經許可，為生產經營目的實施了制造、銷售和許諾銷售被訴侵權產品的行為，且其有關合法來源的抗辯因無相應證據證實不能成立。故判令創遠公司停 78 止侵權并予以賠償?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系外觀設計專利

257、侵權糾紛中“相同或相近種類”產品認定的典型案例。在外觀設計專利侵權訴訟中，是否落入涉案外觀設計專利權保護范圍是專權侵權判斷的重要環節。而能否進行比對則是前提，需審查被訴侵權產品與外觀設計產品種類是否相同或者相近，應綜合考量外觀設計產品的功能、用途、使用環境、消費群體等作出判斷。本案中，涉案外觀設計專利產品與被訴侵權設計產品雖在具體功用上有差別，但在蛋糕經營領域均具有裝飾、美化蛋糕，并作為蛋糕主題吸引消費者選購的作用，且均被蛋糕店鋪經營者使用。在一般消費者看來，蛋糕飾品和飾品模型是相對應的，基于該商品的特性，在蛋糕店鋪通過模型選購對應的蛋糕商品，是蛋糕店鋪常用的經營模式，符合一般消費者的認知。故

258、從產品用途、經營領域和一般消費者認知看，兩者屬于相近種類產品，可以進行侵權比對。79 WEH 公司與朗安公司侵害發明專利權糾紛案【案情摘要】WEH 公司對涉案專利（用于新能源汽車流體管道的過濾部件）享有獨占實施權。該公司發現，朗安公司官網存在對LA-HR1 型加氫口及 LA-HR5 型加氫口的產品介紹，并在上海舉辦的“第十五屆上海國際汽車制造技術與裝備及材料展覽會”和在廣東佛山舉辦的“第三屆中國（佛山）國際氫能與燃料電池技術及產品展覽會”展出上述型號加氫口。（加購買行為）。WEH 公司認為上述型號加氫口中的過濾部件落入涉案專利保護范圍，朗安公司制造、銷售、許諾銷售被訴侵權過濾部件的行為嚴重侵犯

259、了 WEH 公司的涉案專利權，故請求判令朗安公司停止侵權、銷毀制造工具、賠償經濟損失?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，通過技術特征的比對，涉案兩種型號加氫口中的過濾部件的技術方案相同，該技術方案經分解對比技術特征，與涉案專利對應的技術特征構成相同，被訴侵權技術方案落入涉案專利的保護范圍?，F有證據可以認定朗安公司實施了銷售行為，至于許諾銷售，因涉案加氫口可與被訴侵權過濾部件分離，而現有證據無法證實朗安公司展出的加氫口中是否包含被訴侵權過濾部件，故對 WEH 公司主張的許諾銷售未予認定。因涉案專利權已經到期，WEH 公司主張朗安公司停止侵權未予支持。在無初步證據證明存在專用模具、產品庫存及其數量的情況下，不

260、宜直接進行推定，而應依照證據規則結合實際情況綜合認定。最終法院判決朗安公司賠 80 償 WEH 公司經濟損失及合理開支?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系一起涉及新能源汽車相關領域的涉外專利侵權案件，在展會知識產權保護方面具有典型意義。該案對可與終端產品分離的獨立部件如何認定成立許諾銷售，專利到期后權利人主張停止侵權應否支持以及權利人主張銷毀制造被訴侵權產品的庫存與制造工具時舉證責任分配等方面具有參考意義。81 赫某與梅奧公司侵害外觀設計專利權糾紛案【案情摘要】赫某被授予一種名稱為“玉石坐墊”的外觀設計專利，該外觀設計專利證書簡要說明載明：本外觀設計產品的用途為用于理療保??；設計要點在于產品的形狀、圖案和色彩

261、；主視圖最能體現設計要點。該專利處于有效期內。赫某與梅奧公司簽訂委托加工合同書，約定由赫某經營的公司以上述專利技術為梅奧公司代加工相關產品。雙方合作期間，梅奧公司另行委托案外人制造了相同的產品。對此，赫某向天津市河西區知識產權局進行投訴，天津市河西區知識產權局立案后在梅奧公司經營場所查封了涉嫌侵權產品，并裁決侵權成立，責令梅奧公司停止銷售被訴侵權產品。赫某認為梅奧公司委托制造、銷售和許諾銷售的被訴侵權產品的設計特征落入涉案外觀設計專利權保護范圍，要求梅奧公司停止侵權并予以賠償損失?！静门薪Y果】涉案外觀設計專利處于有效期內，且權利穩定。根據天津市河西區市場監督管理局提供的現場檢查照片、詢問筆錄、

262、被訴侵權產品手冊、調取相關證據等，查明梅奧公司在接觸涉案外觀設計專利后，委托案外人為其定制產品進行加工，其中包含被訴侵權產品。被訴侵權產品與外觀設計專利產品兩者用途、功能以及消費群體基本相同，兩者屬于相同種類產品，可以進行侵權比對。經比對，被訴侵權外觀設計與涉案專利外觀設計構成相同設計。梅奧公司自認實施了委托制 82 造、銷售、許諾銷售被訴侵權產品的行為，該自認具有法律效力。梅奧公司委托案外人制造了被訴侵權產品，應當視為梅奧公司實施了制造被訴侵權產品的行為。故認定梅奧公司實施制造、銷售、許諾銷售被訴侵權產品的行為侵害了涉案外觀設計專利權，在案證據無法證明在行政裁決作出后，梅奧公司已停止實施上述

263、侵權行為，故判決梅奧公司停止侵權、賠償損失?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案為人民法院和知識產權行政機關協同懲處知識產權侵權行為提供借鑒。知識產權司法和行政“雙軌制”是加強知識產權保護的一項重要機制。行政機關、司法機關職責不同，知識產權保護側重點亦不同。強化協同保護，形成共治共管的“協同效應”，有利于提升保護效果、降低維權成本、提高維權效率。本案中，行政機關收到侵權投訴并立案受理后，及時對被訴侵權產品進行了封存、并依職權請求外地行政機關協助調查，既快速固定了證據，又節約了權利人的維權成本，提高了維權效率，為后續民事訴訟程序的展開打下了基礎。另外，本案明晰了委托他人制造專利產品，應視為委托人自己實施了制造行為，

264、認定委托制造行為亦構成侵權。83 天汽模公司等與藍晶公司、曉光公司侵害技術秘密糾紛案【案情摘要】原告天汽模公司于 2017 年至 2020 年開發完成“非標件柔性生產線智能控制系統”并享有該系統的相關全部知識產權。參與該系統研發的天汽模公司前員工未經許可將天汽模公司的非標件柔性生產線智能控制系統的源代碼予以下載復制，并在離職后入職被告藍晶公司，在經營過程中，藍晶公司相關員工將該源代碼用于相關智能控制系統研發并以公司名義出售予被告曉光公司獲利。天汽模公司主張其研發的涉案系統中的技術內容構成技術秘密，二被告非法獲取原告技術秘密并獲利，故要求藍晶公司、曉光公司停止侵權并賠償經濟損失及合理開支?！静门?/p>

265、結果】法院認為,涉案技術秘密信息具有秘密性，原告已采取合理保密措施,并且涉案系統能夠給原告帶來經濟利益，因此可以認定涉案技術信息符合技術秘密的構成要件。被告藍晶公司相關員工參與過涉案系統的開發，其將原告公司的技術秘密源代碼下載復制，將該代碼用于為曉光公司研發的非標件柔性生產線智能控制系統，并在制作完成后以公司的名義出售給曉光公司獲利，藍晶公司的侵權行為成立。因無相關證據證明曉光公司參與了被訴侵權系統的開發以及對藍晶公司相關員工擅自復制原告代碼的行為構成應知或明知，故法院認為曉光公司不承擔賠償責任。最終，法院綜合考慮 84 原告的投入以及就同一被訴侵權行為原告在相關刑事案件中已經獲得相關賠償等因

266、素，判令藍晶公司、曉光公司立即停止侵害原告技術秘密的行為，并由藍晶公司賠償原告經濟損失及合理開支?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系法院保護國內領先核心技術秘密的典型案例，在合理分配技術秘密案件舉證責任以及刑民交叉技術秘密侵權案件中如何合理確定賠償數額方面具有典型意義。該案的審理中，法院合理分配舉證責任，在天汽模公司已提供初步證據表明涉嫌侵權人有渠道或者機會獲取商業秘密，且其使用的信息與該商業秘密實質上相同的情況下，將未侵犯技術秘密的舉證責任分配給被告，減輕了原告的舉證責任，解決了技術秘密案件中原告舉證難的問題。同時，該案中及時引入技術調查官，運用第三方鑒定，解決案件涉及的代碼、參數和算法等復雜技術問題。最終

267、，法院認定藍晶公司的侵權行為成立，并在相關刑事案件天汽模公司已獲得 150 萬元賠償的情況下，判令藍晶公司繼續賠償 15 萬元，加大知識產權保護力度。該案一審判決后，各方均服訴息判，藍晶公司主動履行了賠償義務，案件處理效果良好。85 航空設備公司與萬維公司、航空科技公司、上品設計公司外觀設計專利權屬糾紛案【案情摘要】航空科技公司與上品設計公司簽訂設計服務合同書，委托上品設計公司設計自主行李托運系統創新產品即涉案外觀設計，并且約定知識產權歸屬于航空科技公司。合同簽訂后，各方成立微信聊天群，就涉案外觀設計的設計方案等進行溝通，該設計完成后，萬維公司向國家知識產權局申請并獲得外觀設計專利授權。航空設

268、備公司認為，參與涉案外觀設計創作的主要人員系其員工、其系實際委托上品設計公司開發涉案外觀設計的主體以及相關會議紀要已經明確涉案外觀設計歸其所有，故其訴至法院，要求確認其享有涉案外觀設計權屬?！静门薪Y果】法院認為，與上品設計公司簽訂設計服務合同書進行涉案外觀專利設計并支付相應報酬的主體系航空科技公司，上品設計公司亦出具說明認可其系受航空科技公司委托設計涉案外觀設計且所設計產品的知識產權歸航空科技公司所有，航空設備公司員工雖參與設計過程，但僅是在該外觀設計開發過程中提供了相應需求、電器件模型以及部分參數，航空設備公司提交的證據不足以證明其對該外觀設計進行了創造性貢獻，故法院判決駁回航空設備公司的訴

269、訟請求?！镜湫鸵饬x】本案系一起因多方參與外觀設計創作而產生的外觀設 86 計專利權屬糾紛的典型案例，在進一步明確專利法意義上的發明人、設計人的司法認定標準方面具有典型意義。中華人民共和國專利法實施細則第十三條規定，專利法所稱發明人或者設計人，是指對發明創造的實質性特點作出創造性貢獻的人，在完成發明創造過程中，只負責組織工作的人、為物質技術條件的利用提供方便的人或者從事其他輔助工作的人，不是發明人或者設計人。本案中，航空設備公司雖然參與了涉案外觀設計的創作，但其提供的部分模型以及參數并非涉案外觀設計的主要部分以及創新部分，故其并非對該外觀設計作出創造性貢獻的主體，其不構成涉案專利的設計人，無法確認涉案外觀設計的權屬歸其所有。