« Intellectual property » course

Brief summary of case n.6 :

Wuhuan Jingyuan vs.

Japanese Fujikasui and Huayang

Summary

IntroductionPlaintiff and defendant : who are they ?

What’s the technology they are both arguing over ?

Dates and EventsKey points of the different cases

Difficulties and conclusionTechnical issues and and public interest

Introduction

Wuhan Jingyuan Fujikasui Engineering &

Huayan electric power

• owns patent ZL95119389.9

• patent granted on 25/09/99

• plaintiff

“An aeration seawater FGD process and an aeration

device”

• defendant

• is accused of using “Wuhan’s technology”

• tried to invalid wuhan’s patent

Introduction

Desulfurization equipment

Introduction

Wuhan Jingyuan

Huyang Electric

& Fujikasui

1

2

First instance trial

Second instance trial

Dates and events

December 1995

• Wuhuan Jingyuan fills the patent application for his « aeration seawater for Flue Gas Desulfurization process and aeration device », a cleaning system for exhaust gases emitted from fossil fuel power plants

June 1996

• Huayang is in charge of the construction and management of the Fujian Zhangzhou power plant

April 1997

• Huayang asks Fujikasui to equip them in term of Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) technology

• Huayang oders a feasability study of FGD to Wuhan Jingyuan for Zhangzhou Houshi Power Plant, which they complete in December 1997

Dates and Events

2000

• Starting of the operations• Wuhan Jingyang asks Huayang to stop

because of a pattern infringement

September 2001

• Wuhan files and action with Fujian Higher People’s Court

• Objective: Wuhan should stop its infringement and pay for the damages

2004

• Fujikasui starts a patent invalidation proceeding, that fails

Dates and Events

2006

• Fujikasui appeals to the Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court and then to the Beijing Higher People’s Court

• Both validate the patent

12th of may 2008

• Fujian Higher people’s Court reders its judgement :

Fujikasui should pay RMB 50,612,400, based on their own profit turned from the infringement.

The cessation of activity of the plant is not accepted. Instead the plant should pay RMB 240,000 annually, starting from year 2000 and until the end of the patent.

Both sides, unsatisfied by the judgment, appeal to the Supreme People’s Court (SPC)◦ Wuhan estimates the royalties should be higher.◦ Fujikasui and Huayang still do not accept the

patent, that the patented technology should be regarded as a “publicly known technology” and that the technology used is different from the one of the patent anyway.

In the end, the SPC did not change position compared to the judgment of the previous courts

Difficulties and conclusionShowing solid proofsTechnical issuesSocial welfare

An important case in the history of patent infringement