[Success Case]
Case No. 2013 Min-Zhuan-Su-Zi 54, Intellectual Property Court. [Decision Digest]
Although the defendant claims that the plaintiff’s product at issue falls in claims 1 and 6 of the patent at issue after reissue, the combination of exhibits 1 and 5 presented by the defendant can prove that claims 1 and 6 of the patent at issue after reissue lack non-obviousness. According to paragraph 2 of Article 16, Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act, the defendant shall not claim any rights from the plaintiff based on the patent rights at issue. Hence, the plaintiff’s request for confirmation of the non-existence of the defendant’s claim from the plaintiff for injunction and damages arising from the patent right at issue according to paragraph 1 of Article 247, Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure should be approved.
