LONGAN LAW FIRMContents
Long An News
Long An was recognized as Top 50 Chinese patent agencies and ranked 2nd on patent application quality in the field of lighting again
Long An won the China Business Law Awards 2022 in the field of “Employment and Labor Law” by China Business Law Journal
Long An was listed into the 2022 ALB M&A Ranking
Long An Cases
Long An assisted an internationally renowned sports brand in invalidating 12 design patents imitating the client’s trademark
Long An assisted a drying engineering company in winning the utility model invalidation case
Long An assisted a Japanese company in winning a medical equipment utility model invalidation case
Long An represented Chen winning a patent infringement case for a dryer against anenergy technology company
Long An assisted a fitness equipment company in winning a patent invalidation case
Long An assisted an advertising company in winning a promotion contract disputecase
China IP News
Trademark Office of CNIPA: Announcement on Comprehensively Implementing Online Application for Rejection of Review Cases
The SPC Reaffirmed China’s Jurisdiction over SEP Global License Fees in OPPO v. Nokia
Long An Top 10 IP Cases in 2021 (Cases 9-10)
Case 9: Special legal services for a variety talent show named “Shuijingjing Nanxun, Shuijingjing Girls”
Case 10: Long An represented ZHONGQIAO SPORTS CO., LTD in a special action to crack down on a series of infringements of “Qiaodan China Monopoly”
Long An Comments
An analysis on the termination of labor contract during the probation period due to not meeting the employment conditions
An examination of the disputes between influencers and MCNs from the perspective of big data
Long An News
Long An was recognized as Top 50 Chinese patent agencies and ranked 2nd on patent application quality in the field of lighting again
Recently, IP Lead and IP House released the “Comprehensive List of TOP 50 Chinese Patent Agencies (Domestic Agency Business), September”. The list is based on the dual indicators of the quantity and quality of patent agency, and shows the TOP 50 agencies with outstanding comprehensive strength in each field. Long An Law Firm was shortlisted and ranked 2nd on patent application quality in the field of lighting again.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Hn33jipMY7CvZEm3a3U19g
Long An won the China Business Law Awards 2022 in the field of “Employment and Labor Law” by China Business Law Journal
Recently, China Business Law Journal, a well-known legal media, officially released the list of the China Business Law Awards 2022. Long An won the China Business Law Awards in the field of “Employment and Labor Law” for the third time after 2016 and 2021.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/rs1KYd7dWoVFijxyswaBdw
Long An was listed into the 2022 ALB M&A Ranking
On September 22, Thomson Reuters ALB announced the list of “2022 ALB M&A Ranking”. Long An was included into the list of China domestic firms with its excellent practice ability, rich experience, and good industry reputation in the field of mergers and acquisitions.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/NHbrQNHtQ2sXvoQxX9LOYw
Long An Cases
Long An assisted an internationally renowned sports brand in invalidating 12 design patents imitating the client’s trademark
Recently, Long An lawyers, Mr. Jianjun Fu, Mr. Yuan Piao, Mr. Lei Wen and Ms. Alice Chengyan Zhao assisted an internationally renowned sports brand in successfully invalidating 12 design patents.
In this case, according to the client’s request, the Long An team filed a patent invalidation request for a series of design patents that were suspected of imitating the client’s famous trademark, on the grounds that they are not in compliance with Article 23, paragraph 3 of the Patent Law (PRC). Long An successfully made the collegiate panel adopt their claim with abundant and detailed evidence, determine that the relevant logos in the designs involved are similar to the client’s previously registered trademark, and declare all 12 designs involved invalid.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/EglJCrhs3etMn2o1IFcfOA
Long An assisted a drying engineering company in winning the utility model invalidation case
Recently, Long An lawyers, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Jianjun Fu, Mr. Yuan Piao, and Mr. Xiaojun Zheng represented a drying engineering company and successfully won a case of invalidation of a utility model patent for a directional side-blown air distributor.
In this case, according to the client’s request, the Long An team filed a request for invalidation of the utility model patent involved. They carefully analyzed the examination history of the patent involved and the prior applications of the patent applicant involved, and determined the key distinguishing technical features and key search directions in this case. In the end, the CNIPA adopted their defense opinion and decided that all the claims of the patent involved were invalid.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/1IK9coFNyr9dK6DzYEwhQg
Long An assisted a Japanese company in winning a medical equipment utility model invalidation case
Recently, Long An lawyers, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Yuan Piao and Mr. Lei Wen successfully won a utility model patent invalidation case concerning “interventional instrument for relieving prostatic hyperplasia”, and all the claims of the patent involved were declared invalid.
In this case, the Long An team represented the client to file a request for invalidation of the utility model patent involved. The patent involved obviously plagiarized the prior patent application as the prior art. In the invalidation request, the Longan team compared the claims of the patent involved with the prior patent application, and specifically analyzed the reasons why the claims of the patent involved were not novel. The specific technical features disclosed implicitly were supplemented by textbooks and technical standards and other materials for detailed comments. In the end, the collegiate panel adopted the client’s claim and held that all the claims of the patent involved were not novel, and the patent involved was invalid.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/pDMMYfQx_saG-uuscGuA9A
Long An represented Mr. Chen winning a patent infringement case for a dryer against an energy technology company
Recently, Long An lawyers, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Jianjun Fu and Mr. Xiaojun Zheng won the case concerning “Mr. Chen sued an Energy Technology Company in Shandong and a Biotechnology Company in Heilongjiang for Infringement of Invention Patent”. Heilongjiang Harbin Intermediate People’s Court upheld our claim and decided that the defendant should cease selling the infringing products involved and compensate the plaintiff for financial losses of CNY 150,000 and reasonable expenses for rights protection of CNY 50,000.
The court recognized the plaintiff’s right of action in this case, and held that the equipment that Defendant A promised to sell constituted the same product as the patent involved, fell within the scope of protection of claims 4 and 5 of the patent involved, and infringed the invention patent involved. The defendant promised to sell the patent-infringing products involved without the permission of the plaintiff, and should bear the corresponding responsibilities for ceasing the infringement and compensating for losses.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/DURbVtlJgZgWaD7pXDQuSw
Long An assisted a fitness equipment company in winning a patent invalidation case
Recently, Long An lawyers, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Jianjun Fu and Mr. Xiaojun Zheng won the case concerning invalidation of the utility model patent for a telescopic horizontal bar. The CNIPA supported our request and declared the patent involved invalid.
In this case, Long An represented a fitness equipment company in Shandong to file a request for invalidation of the patent involved. In the process of producing the document and oral trial, our lawyers pointedly stated that the relevant technical features of the claims of patent involved have been disclosed in the reference documents, and those skilled in the art were motivated to find the technology of the relevant anti-loosening structure in the field of threaded anti-loosening. In the end, the CNIPA accepted our viewpoint and declared that all the claims of the patent involved were not inventive and did not meet the provisions of Article 22, paragraph 3 of the Patent Law, and the patent involved invalid.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/XgqXuau-oq1MmWZjnu7Egg
Long An assisted an advertising company in winning a promotion contract dispute case
Recently, Long An lawyers, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Jianjun Fu and Mr. Yueyan Hou won a promotion contract dispute case.
In this case, the plaintiff and the defendant signed the “XX Test Promotion Project Execution Contract 2019”. The plaintiff fulfilled all contractual obligations on time, but the defendant owed the balance payment. The plaintiff communicated with the defendant many times without obtaining the balance payment and sued it to the court. In the end, the People’s Court of Gongqingcheng, Jiangxi Province ordered the defendant, a food therapy technology company in Jiangxi, to pay the plaintiff, an advertising company in Beijing (our client), in full for the balance of the contract price claimed by us, a penalty for overdue payment at an annual interest rate of 10%, and reasonable expenses for rights protection.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/t2HtecRTA0D4hyjIcHj8eg
China IP News
Trademark Office of CNIPA: Announcement on Comprehensively Implementing Online Application for Rejection of Review Cases
The Trademark Office of CNIPA issued the Announcement on Comprehensively Implementing Online Application for Rejection of Review Cases on September 5. According to the Announcement, from November 1, 2022, when trademark agencies handle the rejection review business, they should submit electronic application through the trademark online service system in principle, rather than submit paper materials.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/lzA_byCptxvPnYfEFkLmlw
The SPC Reaffirmed China’s Jurisdiction over SEP Global License Fees in OPPO v. Nokia
On September 7, 2022, the Intellectual Property Court of the SPC made a final ruling on the jurisdiction over global license fees dispute in OPPO v. Nokia, rejecting Nokia’s appeal request, and upholding the first instance ruling made by the First Intermediate People’s Court of Chongqing.
The Intellectual Property Court of the SPC held that China is one of the major places for granting the SEPs involved, the place for negotiating the license agreement, the place where the performance is reasonably foreseeable after the conclusion of the contract, and one of the major places for exploitation license, which has close geographical connection with the dispute in this case, and Chinese courts have undisputed jurisdiction over this case. In addition, the people’s court in the place where the SEP is mainly licensed has an appropriate connection with the dispute and has jurisdiction over the dispute, and can also hear the civil dispute involved, that is, the license conditions of the SEP involved.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/4x0Bsy3Uskn-jicMsgJ3uQ
Long An Top 10 IP Cases in 2021 (Cases 9-10)
Case 9: Special legal services for a variety talent show named “Shuijingjing Nanxun, Shuijingjing Girls”
In 2021, the IP team of Long An was entrusted by the organizer of a variety talent show named “Shuijingjing Nanxun, Shuijingjing Girls” to provide special legal services during the whole process. The lawyer team conducted risk assessment and monitoring of each link of the program such as program campaigning, audition, preliminary round, and final, etc.
Long An lawyers provided effective legal opinions on the intellectual property dispute between “some music institute” and “Shuijingjing Girls”, which ensured the normal and smooth progress of the program.
Case 10: Long An represented ZHONGQIAO SPORTS CO., LTD in a special action to crack down on a series of infringements of “Qiaodan China Monopoly”
Our client found that there were a large number of clothing, shoes and balls branded with “Qiaodan China Monopoly” put on sale on Internet platforms such as Douyin and Kuaishou, etc., and then they entrusted lawyers from Long An to conduct an in-depth investigation of relevant infringements and file litigations to protect their rights.
Long An fixed the evidence of infringement through notarized purchase, and identified the producers, sellers and other entities of the infringing products through the investigation, so as to crack down on the chain of infringing products in an all-round way, which effectively stopped the infringement.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/QEX5YGEQo0kaI1EKU6uzMw
Long An Comments
An analysis on the termination of labor contract during the probation period due to not meeting the employment conditions
For the circumstance where an employee is not competent for the job during the probation period, the court did not strictly apply the provisions of Article 40(2) of the Labor Contract Law literally. We believe that the main reasons are: firstly, Article 39(1) is a specific termination rule of the contract for the probation period, while Article 40(2) is the termination rule of the contract for the entire performance of the labor contract; secondly, from the perspective of the term of the probation period, depending on the different terms of the labor contract, the upper limit of the probation period stipulated by law is one month, two months and six months respectively, so for the case of an agreed one-month probation period, it is impossible to give a 30-day notice if the employee is found not to be competent for the job during the probation period; thirdly, based on the purpose of establishing a probation period, when the employee is found not to meet the requirements of the job or is incompetent for the job during the probation period, the employer has the right to terminate immediately, which shows the value of the labor law, so the full exercise of the right of independent employment should be ensured under the premise of legality and reasonableness. The employer’s burden of proof and explanation are sufficient to regulate the employer’s right to terminate the labor contract, which does not need to harshly impose the obligation of advance notice or the obligations to re-train or transfer the job.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/-N2TdHO3_mxMbwSYHwmYeg
An examination of the disputes between influencers and MCNs from the perspective of big data
Recently, the livestreaming industry has developed rapidly, and there are more and more disputes over payment and compensation for breach of contract, etc. between influencers and MCNs. MCNs usually file a lawsuit for contract dispute because the influencers have breached the contract, while the influencers usually argue that there is an employment relationship between the two parties. Therefore, whether there is an employment relationship between the influencers and the MCNs is the key to the application of the law in such cases.
The principles followed by the court for determining whether there is a labor relationship lies in: whether the influencer is subordinate to the management of the MCN, whether the various management regulations of the MCN apply to the influencer, and whether the influencer has a personal dependence on the MCN. Usually, the above will be reflected from the degree of control of the MCN on the influencer’s salary, that is, whether the MCN has a reward and punishment system for the influencer, whether the MCN can reduce or increase payment completely according to its regulations; the degree of management of the MCN, such as the arrangement of daily attendance, job descriptions, work locations, etc.; and whether the actual employment, i.e. the labor provided by the influencer is a part of the MCN’s business, etc.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/5mcE8Cg-XecclP8wQGqeoQ
For more details, please follow us on: