The highly professional expression of "Hyperbolic Damping and Isolation Friction Pendulum Device" is relatively unfamiliar to most non-employees. However, from the point of view that everyone is most familiar with and closest to life, it will resonate a lot. In fact, this product is a bridge bearing used in highway bridge construction. So under the background that it is widely used but repeatedly infringed, how to strike a balance in multiple contradictions such as people's livelihood, cost, infringement and so on? How to maximize the protection of the rights and interests of the parties? Please see below.

Dig Deep into the Points of Contention and Start Again in the Second Instance
In this case, the patent name of the utility model involved is “Hyperbolic Damping and Isolation Friction Pendulum Device”, and the product involved is suitable for road and bridge shock absorption. The patentee Beijing Infore Technology Co.,Ltd.(hereinafter referred to as Infore company) claimed that Gansu company A (hereinafter referred to as Infore company) purchased the accused infringing product “Rubber Bearing for Cable Damping and Isolation” from Hengshui company B (hereinafter referred to as company B) fell into the scope of patent protection involved in the case, and requested the court to order company A and company B to stop the infringement and compensate for economic losses. According to the relevant drawings and other evidence submitted by the parties, the court of first instance determined that the alleged infringing products did not fall within the scope of patent protection and rejected all litigation claims of Infore company.

In order to effectively protect its own rights and interests, Infore company entrusted our firm to analyze the case and consult the feasibility of filing an appeal. After a comprehensive understanding of the evidence of the case, Gaowo’s lawyers made it clear that the key controversial point in this case should be whether the technical characteristics of the products actually produced, sold and used by the other party fell within the scope of protection of the claim. After that, Gaowo’s lawyers filed an appeal to the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court on behalf of Infore Company.

The Judge Seeks Truth and Pragmatism and Inspects at the Bottom of the Viaduct
The accused infringing products in this case were used in the construction of the involved Yanchong high-speed project. Both company A and B stated in the court hearing that the accused infringing products had been used in the construction of the project and neither party had inventory. In addition, because of the dispute over the technical characteristics of "scissors and bolts are set between upper support plate and lower support plate" of the accused infringing product determined by the court of first instance only through the construction drawing, Gaowo’s lawyers raised an objection in the second instance and applied for on-site inspection. The court of second instance organized the parties to conduct on-site inspection in order to find out the technical facts of the case.

Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 's epidemic, the inspection plan ran aground again and again. Driven by the earnest expectation of Gaowo’s lawyer and the concept of "people-centered" of the collegial panel, just a few days after the emergency response level of the epidemic in Beijing was lowered to level 3, the court organized all parties to conduct an on-site inspection of the Guojiayao Bridge in Chicheng County, Zhangjiakou City, Hebei Province. In this process, the judges stood in the lifting equipment with the parties twice and were lifted to the bottom of the 10-meter-high viaduct, determined the specific location of the infringing products in the high altitude, and conducted a meticulous inspection, fully listening to the opinions of both parties, reflecting the truth-seeking and pragmatic attitude and rigorous and meticulous work style of the judges of the intellectual property Court of the Supreme Court.

Long Way to Defend Rights, Live up to the Trust
From the long process of going back and forth to the scene to take photos for evidence, to repeatedly being stranded on-site inspecation, and then to the long process of presenting opinions in front of the facts, we finally ushered in the clarion call of victory. The court of second instance finally approved our lawyer's opinion that "the accused infringing product has the same technical characteristics as the patent claim and falls into the protection scope of the patent right involved", supported our appeal, revoked the judgment of first instance and ordered the defendant to compensate the patentee for economic losses and reasonable expenses for safeguarding rights.

We believe that this trial will be an unforgettable experience for the parties, lawyers and judges. Due to the impact of the epidemic, it has been delayed again and again, and the alleviation of the epidemic has ushered in good results. We firmly believe that good things go hard, and we firmly believe that our professional will win the trust of customers from the heart.
We firmly believe that only focus can make it professional!

A Brief Introduction to the Team of Lawyers Handling Case

LIU Lindong

LIANG Fengde

The patent litigation team of Gaowo Law Firm is composed of well-known experts and professors, senior lawyers, patent agents and technical experts in various fields and other high-end talents. Most of the members have dual qualifications of lawyers and patent agents, and have rich experience in the protection, layout, confirmation and rights protection of corporate intellectual property rights. In the case handling team, Mr. LIU Lindong is a senior partner of Gaowo Law Firm and a well-known intellectual property lawyer in China. Mr. LIANG Fengde is a senior lawyer in the field of patent protection and the core member of the team. The excellent performance of the case handling lawyers in this case has helped the parties successfully safeguard their legitimate rights and interests.