logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2015.05.28 2015재허17
등록무효(특)
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (the plaintiff).

The purport of request for retrial.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Name of the instant patent invention 1: C2) Date of application/registration date/registration number: D/E/F 3) patentee: Plaintiff (Plaintiff for reexamination)

B. Prior inventions 1) Prior Inventions 1: 203:08 of the registered utility model publicly announced on September 26, 2003 is related to the "water smelling expenses" as indicated in Article 32808 of the registered utility model registration publicly announced on September 26, 200. 2) Prior Inventions 2: 2:00 of the Japanese Utility Model Gazette 4-83136 published on July 20, 192.

C. On June 23, 2010, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for retrial of the instant case with respect to the instant patent invention under the Intellectual Property Tribunal No. 2010Da1609 against the Plaintiff on June 23, 2010 (hereinafter “ordinary technician”).

(2) On October 21, 2010, the Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a trial ruling accepting the above request for a trial on the grounds that the nonobviousness is denied by prior inventions 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant trial ruling”).

3) On the instant trial decision, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of a trial decision with the Patent Court No. 2010Heo8474, and the Patent Court rendered a judgment for revocation on May 13, 2011, dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that the nonobviousness is denied by prior inventions 1 and 2. The original judgment was served on the Plaintiff on May 23, 2011, and the Plaintiff was served on the Plaintiff on May 23, 2011. (4) The Plaintiff appealed to the judgment for retrial, and the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on July 14, 2011, and became final and conclusive.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 8, 27, 28, substantial facts in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of grounds for retrial of the Plaintiff’s assertion

arrow