Ultimate Counterattack: Key Extrinsic Evidence Secures Victory, Safeguarding the Lifeline and Market Reputation of the Lighting Enterprise

2025-11-19

I. Case Introduction
A lighting company's products were suddenly subject to a patent infringement lawsuit, posing a severe threat to the company's survival and market prospects. The ZYIP team was called upon to act under urgent circumstances. By responding quickly and positioning precisely, through in-depth technical analysis and the successful acquisition and application of key "extraterritorial evidence", they achieved a reversal of the case in the first and second instances, ultimately winning the final victory. This battle not only helped the client retain its core products and market, but also its professional response strategy was included in the industry's classic case library, becoming a model for enterprises to deal with intellectual property crises.

II. Case Details
Customer type/Industry
A company that has been deeply involved in the fields of energy storage and intelligent lighting, and is dedicated to the research and production of street lamp products.

2. Customer Pain Points/Problem Descriptions
(1) Survival Crisis: The core street lighting products have been accused of patent infringement, facing the significant risks of product suspension and loss of market share.
(2) Reputation Crisis: The accumulated corporate reputation and customer relationships have been severely damaged due to the lawsuit, and the business reputation has been directly challenged.
(3) Urgent Response: The litigation process is urgent, and it is necessary to formulate effective countermeasures and find breakthroughs within a limited time, with immense pressure.

3. Solution and Process
After taking on the case, the ZYIP team immediately activated the crisis response mechanism:
(1) Rapid Response and Deep Engagement: At the earliest possible time, they coordinated a professional legal team to visit the client and conduct in-depth communication with the client's technical and management teams. They precisely dissected the technical details of the involved patent, sorted out the research and development process and innovation points of the client's own products, and quickly determined the core direction for responding to the lawsuit.
(2) Overcoming Key "Overseas Evidence": After identifying the key evidence that could directly prove the rationality of the technology located overseas, the ZYIP team coordinated multiple resources and overcame the barriers of cross-border evidence collection. Through deep investigation, verification of authenticity, and sorting out legality, they ultimately presented a complete set of "overseas evidence" to the court.
(3) Effective Court Negotiation: During the trial, the "overseas evidence" submitted by the ZYIP team was officially adopted by the court, becoming the core basis for refuting the infringement accusations and proving the originality of the technology. This successfully reversed the litigation situation.

4. Outcomes/Results
(1) Victory Outcome: After going through the first instance and the second instance, the case was ultimately ruled in favor of the client, completely eliminating the client's legal risks.
(2) Commercial Protection: The client's core product was able to continue to be sold in the market, avoiding losses of tens of millions of yuan that might have resulted from the ban on sales, and preserving valuable customer resources and market channels.
(3) Industry Recognition: This case was included in the industry's classic cases of intellectual property rights protection due to its breakthrough in the application of "extraterritorial evidence" and its professional overall response, and was widely referenced and cited.
(4) Reputation Restoration: Through successful litigation, not only was the enterprise's reputation restored, but it also demonstrated to the market the enterprise's strong innovative confidence and legal guarantee capabilities.

III. Case Significance
This case serves as a benchmark for small and medium-sized enterprises in dealing with sudden intellectual property crises. It fully demonstrates that in litigation that determines the survival of an enterprise, the key to victory lies not only in the proficient application of legal provisions, but also in forward-looking evidence strategies and efficient resource integration capabilities. The ZYIP team, through the combination of the "rapid response mechanism" and "key evidence breakthrough", transformed a seemingly passive defensive battle into an active counterattack, greatly boosting the confidence of innovative enterprises when facing unfair lawsuits. This case reminds us that professional intellectual property protection is an indispensable "safety shield" and "source of confidence" for enterprises, especially technology-based small and medium-sized enterprises, in the fierce market competition.

Return

Previous：Three cases involving disputes over infringement of utility model patent rights Next：From the Struggle for Rights to Market Leadership: The Intellectual Property Defense Battle and Business Breakthrough of a Bag Manufacturing Enterprise