ZYIP's pharmaceutical agency successfully handled a 30 million patent infringement case, achieving a double victory in both the legal process and the substantive aspects, and was selected as a top cas

2025-11-19

I. Case Overview
This case involved ZYIP representing a pharmaceutical company in Guangdong to defend against an infringement lawsuit filed by a company in Hunan, with the claimed infringement amount reaching 30 million yuan. The ZYIP team strategically filed a jurisdictional objection, successfully transferring the case from the Beijing Intellectual Property Court to the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court in the first instance. During the first instance trial, they began with a technical feature comparison and effectively demonstrated that the accused technical solution did not fall within the protection scope of the involved patent. Ultimately, the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court ruled to dismiss all the plaintiff's claims, and our client achieved a complete victory. Due to the typicality of the procedural and substantive trial, this case was selected for the "Intellectual Property Excellent Case Analysis" (2022) of the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court.

II. Case Details
1.Customer type/Industry
A pharmaceutical company in Guangdong, specializing in the research and production of traditional Chinese medicines.

2. Customer Pain Points/Problem Description
(1) Facing a huge claim of 30 million yuan, the enterprise is under great operational pressure;
(2) The infringing products have been discontinued, and there is no business connection with the Beijing pharmacy where the plaintiff conducted the investigation, thus facing the risk of being "subjected to jurisdiction";
(3) The involved patent technology is complex, covering multiple dimensions such as formulation, application, and preparation methods, making the infringement comparison extremely difficult.

3. Solutions and Processes
(1) Winning through the Procedure: Precisely raising jurisdictional objections
The ZYIP law firm team conducted an in-depth analysis and discovered that the plaintiff had engaged in "trap evidence collection" to improperly link the jurisdiction. After providing sufficient evidence and arguments, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court ruled to recognize our viewpoint and transferred the case to the court closer to our client's location - the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court, laying the foundation for the fair trial of the case.

(2) Entity Victory: Precise Defense of Core Technical Characteristics
In the first instance, regarding the complex situation of the involved patent consisting of three parts: composition, application, and preparation method, our side broke through each item from the technical perspective:
① Composition: Applying the "principle of non-reversibility", we successfully restricted the arbitrary expansion of the patent rights scope;
② Application and Preparation Method: We provided detailed arguments that the accused product was neither the same as nor equivalent to the patent scheme;
③ Comprehensive Coverage Principle: We systematically demonstrated that the accused technical scheme did not fall within the protection scope of the patent rights.

4. Case Outcomes
(1) Complete Victory: The Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court fully adopted our legal arguments and, based on the principle of comprehensive coverage, determined that the alleged infringing technical solution did not fall within the protection scope of the patent rights. The first-instance judgment dismissed all of the plaintiff's litigation requests;
(2) Avoiding Massive Losses: Our client successfully avoided potential losses of 30 million yuan and the commercial risk of ceasing infringement;
(3) Selected as a Model Case: This case was included in the "Intellectual Property Model Case Analysis" (2022) of the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court due to its typical significance and guiding value in procedural and substantive legal issues, and received high recognition from the judicial community.

III. Case Significance

This case is a typical litigation example that achieved a perfect comeback through an outstanding procedural strategy and profound technical analysis. It not only demonstrates the comprehensive practical capabilities of ZYIP in handling complex and high-value intellectual property disputes, but also showcases its superb skills in the combined application of procedural law and substantive law. The victory in this case effectively safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of the client and maintained the normal business order. At the same time, it provided valuable practical references for the industry in dealing with similar patent disputes and jurisdictional disputes, and has significant exemplary significance for regulating the order of intellectual property litigation and maintaining a fair judicial environment.

Return

Previous：ZYIP successfully used the "implied patent license" defense, assisting Rui Company in winning a 15.15 million patent lawsuit and being selected as a typical case. Next：Nothing