The Study On Application Of The Doctrine Of Equivalents In Inferior Invention

In many patent infringement, there is a behavior through changing the necessary features of the independent patent claims, that is, inferior invention. Inferior to the characteristics is by the purpose of infringement deliberately omitted or falsified the right to request the necessary technical features resulting from deformation characteristics. The infringer in order to escape infringement, may be inferior to the characteristics of the means to omit or altered by invasion of patent claims at least one of the technical features necessary to make infringing products technical features and patent claims contained in the form of non-technical features the same, even though such acts should not lead to substantive changes in the technical program or function / effect of the upgrade, but easier to achieve infringement and the purpose of impunity. Based on the relevant theoretical research of doctrine of equivalents, and Dalian Xinyi Building Materials Ltd. v. Dalian Renda New Wall Building Materials Plant patent infringement disputes is used as example, pointed out the specific issues of the doctrine of equivalents in the inferior invention .At the same time, I provide a reference legislative model to the doctrine of equivalents.This article includes five parts of the body.The first part is about the case brief introduction. Dalian Xinyi Building Materials Ltd. v. Dalian Renda New Wall Building Materials Plant patent infringement disputes case for easy introduction, and through analysis of the case involved in the focus of the dispute, which leads to whether the doctrine of equivalents should be applied in the inferior invention and how to apply it.The second part is about the research of same basic theoretical principles of equivalence. Through a comparative study of the doctrine of equivalents in order to discover the real meaning of the doctrine of equivalents and to further discuss the value of its legislation; the same time, this part analyzed the relations between the doctrine of equivalents and the doctrine of estoppel, pointed out that the two doctrines are both methods of defining the scope of patent protection.The third part is about the comparative study on inferior invention. By comparing the attitudes of countries to the inferior invention and analyzing of the causes of attitudes, combined with the attitude of our country, come to our country should apply the doctrine of equivalents in the field of inferior invention, but the doctrine should be strictly controlled.Part IV analyzing the application of the doctrine of equivalents in this case. By analyzing the specific case in order to introduce specific examples of the inferior invention should consider the doctrine of equivalents and estoppel; as well as through the analysis and found that the lack of the court decision.The fifth part is the reflections on the case. Because errors in the application documents are the important reasons for the invention, the application documents for the specific analysis of errors is in an attempt to draw lessons from examples of the applicant; In addition to the court's decision also to consider the corresponding.Part VI, to determine patent infringement on the existing methods of reflection and design of the system. Pointed out that the scope of patent protection should be considered as legal issues and set out the reasons; also pointed out that the litigation involved in patent should be received and ruled by the Patent Reexamination Board, or at least there is such a body should be involved in a proceeding before a court, at the same time patent infringement cases should be given to the patent-related lawsuit after a formal source of law.