Table of Contents
Written by : Jenice Asperheim
Current : 4171
Write a comment
Write a comment
Thanks for this great article
Thanks for your comment Lyman Kloos, have a nice day.
- Jenice Asperheim, Staff Member
thank you for joining us today for Kristian Richardson's first webinar in our new IP perspectives you was in China webinar series my name is Tom Russell ah which I'm very pleased today to be joined by a colleague from the Han kun law firm Yan Yan Wang I'm also joined by my colleague yaw Wang and associate in the Washington DC office of Fish & Richardson for those of you are in our state our biographies will appear on the side of your screen this series will focus on IP issues affecting transnational portfolios with both US and Chinese attendees future future webinars in the series will cover ITC issues damages law industry specific topics such as patents for financial services and life sciences please keep an eye on your inbox for those invitations and you can follow us on Twitter for updates at fishing Richardson today's webinar were one for one hour and include question-and-answer period at the end of the program you may ask questions at any time throughout the program by clicking on the Q&A widget at the bottom of your screen to submit your question we'll do our best to answer them at the end of the presentation time permitting please also feel free to contact us personally after the webinar if that's easier before we get started I should remind you that the content of this presentation is for educational purposes only and there's not necessarily reflect the opinions of frisson Richardson and is also not intended to address every court or every situation thank you and as we mentioned this is an inaugural webinar series for us one and certainly that we aim to build upon the success we've enjoyed with with our other webinars including a litigation and post post grant endeavors and it's a little bit different than maybe some of our other webinars we really try and tackle a very particular topic in depth instead in this case where we try and maybe speak to some common perceptions and really try and give the audience a better sense of what were the concerns is commonly understood maybe some time back and really try and give this audience a sense of what the most current trends are and what might be in the works either is proposing some of the laws and regulations that might further revise and address expectations as related to pursuing an electro property in China itself so I'm pleased again to be joined by my colleagues yeah one of the hand Kuhn law firm with that we'll jump right into the meat of the matter again please know CLE is available for us attendees in some jurisdictions we will be releasing the CLE code near the end of the presentation so today we hope to speak and provide an overview of prominent US concerns like to provide you a brief background on Chinese patent practice we'll take a brief survey of recent news headlines will offer a comparative analysis of some prominent US concerns as interpretated in China as interpreted in China will also speak to some differences between US and Chinese priorities we'll also offer an upcoming overview of the upcoming topics maybe we'll start just to develop a common understanding would have been some of the more recent concerns as articulated in a 2000 hole at a US Patent and Trademark Office report identifying the following concerns for US companies seeking to enforce intellectual property rights in China these concerns included concerns over the Chinese pet legal regime rule of law problems issues related to evidence collection recognition and preservation effectiveness and enforcement of remedies and administrative enforcement and so walk through and walk through some of these concerns in greater detail in the next slide and really give this audience a sense of the nuanced nature the concerns that were articulated in indeed was not seen as a broad this report was not seen as a broad expression of concerns but rather dealt with some very particular topics that they believed us rights holders would would want to see addressed and the years to come as a as we witness the US companies continue to explore an electric property protection in China speaking of these higher level of concerns in greater detail some of the concerns as relates to the Chinese pet legal regime is simply the role of utility models and I think the among the most prominent concerns was really a lack of appreciation for US companies on and whether or not utility model should be pursued how they play out in practice my assessment has to be one of education more than anything else another question really related to will love questions in particular what's the basis as the cases filed the case initially has to be accepted what was the basis for that acceptance the report also discussed the thoroughness of written decisions particularly in appeals and in really desire into having a independent basis of review from a a lower court decision finally there are some questions as to what the limited use of discovery was especially for some of the injunctive of the relief that would be desire Li ideally sought earlier in a case how could discovery the better available relative to some of the pleadings requirement that would be sought after for in order to seek a preliminary injunction finally there were some questions over the to scope of damages some of the difficulty in obtaining injunctions and and finally someone other questions really spoke to the low threshold required to initiate invalidity proceedings once a litigation has begun and so with that I'll I'll really turn it over to our good friend here oh yeah and really let him speak to speak to his assessment on and you know what are the concern you know are these still concerns and have they been addressed and what are we seeing for trends so thank you young thank you Tom and thank you yalla and thank you for giving me this opportunity to share my experience practicing IP law in China with you and they're talking about the US concerns I totally agree with Tom that on this slide number six all these the topics there are legitimate concerns for multinationals in particular for US companies doing business in China I will give my high-level comment to each of them and if you have any specific questions feel free to interrupt me at any time or feel free to contact me afterwards regarding China's patent legal regime the role of utility models is the general designer for developing country so the general idea is for utility model patent it will not be examining the substantively and the obvious needs requirement is going to be lower for utility model patents so only offensive side of from a multinationals perspective yuria the multinational companies will get both utility model patents and the companion in management patents you will get the acidity model pad patents a faster because it's not examining the substantively but as soon as you get imagine patent the utility model patent will be deemed abandoned automatically so that's only offensive side on the defensive side a lot of smaller companies in particular Chinese companies they will choose to file for the utility model patents only but you can imagine that these patterns are not that a stable if they rely on th
Thanks Elvera your participation is very much appreciated
- Jenice Asperheim
About the author
I've studied physical metallurgy at Columbia College Hollywood in Tarzana and I am an expert in marine engineering. I usually feel bored. My previous job was physical therapist I held this position for 11 years, I love talking about filmmaking and rowing. Huge fan of Bill Nighy I practice kickboxing and collect crater critters.
Try Not to laugh !
Joke resides here...