logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2019.08.14 2019허1346
권리범위확인(디)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) The plaintiff's registered design (a) 1)/ the filing date of the registered design of this case (a)/ the registration date/registration number: C/D/E2: The main contents of the F3 design and a description of drawings;

1. Materials are metal materials or synthetic resin. The product of the registered design of this case is finished at the end of the eaves or the end of the eaves and the end of theme. 2. [Do 1.1] The drawing indicating the whole shape [Do 1.2] / [Do 1.2] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.3] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.4] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.5] / the drawing expressing the right side / [Do 1.6] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.6] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.7] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.7] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.7] / the drawing expressing the part / [Do 1.1] / [Do 1.1] is a drawing expressing the shape of “F” and the shape of shape and shape as the part

b. [Do 1.1] Heado Do 1.1] Heado Mado Do 1.1 / Do 1.2 / Do 1.3 / Do / 1.3 / Do / 1.4 / Do / 1.5 / Do 1.6 / Do / 1.6 / Do / Do / Do / 1.7

B. The design subject to confirmation (attached Form 2) is a design relating to “F” specified by the Plaintiff, which is a product of the Defendant’s own, and its drawings are as follows:

[Lindo] [Lindo [Lindo] [Lindoing plane] [Surging plane] [Surging plane] [Surging Ground] [Surging Ground] [Lindoging Ground] [Lindoging Ground

C. In the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff submitted the evidence No. 5 as evidence by specifying the evidence No. 1 for prior design 1 and No. 6 as evidence, respectively. The Defendant stated in the reply submitted on March 4, 2019 that the evidence No. 5 is referred to as prior design 2 and No. 6 as prior design 1 for the purpose of complying with the specification of the prior design in the instant trial decision. However, the evidence No. 1 for prior design 1 and No. 6 as the evidence No. 2 according to the Plaintiff’s specific nature, which was directly submitted by the Plaintiff.

1) Pre-design 1 (A)(5).

arrow