With over 200 dedicated professionals, Beijing East IP has helped a full spectrum of clients – from startups to Fortune 500 corporations to domestic multinational companies – on their intellectual property issues in China.
Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand:
Beijing East IP -
2017 Tier 2 Firm Ranked by MIP
Following the success in 2016 MIP IP Stars Ranking, once again Beijing East IP is ranked as 2017 Tier 2 Firm in China for both trademark contentious and trademark prosecution practices by MIP.
Learn more details here.
BEIP Provided IP Services to China
Blockchain Industry Competition
BEIP was appointed as the legal service team and provided one-stop professional IP services for the competition.
Please click here for more information!
New Books Available Now!
Beijing East IP’s experienced patent attorneys present the know-hows of China patent practices and insights into the latest IPR proceeding at the PTAB.
Please contact [email protected] for your complimentary copy.
BEIJING, September 2017 – In the lead of Office of the National Leading Group on the Fight Against IPR Infringement and Counterfeiting and with the support of China Industry-University-Research Institute Collaboration Association, national primary associations China Anti-Infringement and Anti-Counterfeit Innovation Strategic Alliance (hereinafter referred to be “the Alliance”) in cooperation with hundreds of enterprises and public institutions.
On 15th of March 2018, in the evaluation of Outstanding Patent Attorney and Patent Agency of the Year held by Goldwind, our client, Beijing East IP Ltd. was awarded Outstanding Patent Agency of the Year for our serious and responsible attitude as well as professional service toward clients. Several attorneys of our company won the Distinguished Service Award, the Distinguished Contribution Award, and the title of “Talented Patent Writer”.
BEIJING, December 8 – Dr. Xiaodong LI, president of our company, was selected to be a member of the Legal Advisory Team of Overseas Chinese Affairs Office of the State Council. The Legal Advisory Team consists of professional lawyers specializing in different fields and aims to protect the lawful rights and interests of returned overseas Chinese and their relative and Hong Kong and Macau compatriots by offering them legal advice and aid.
On March 18, 2018, the General Office of the State Council issued the “Working Measures for Foreign Transfer of Intellectual Property Rights (Trial)” (hereinafter referred to as the “Measures”), and clarified the relevant regulations on the foreign transfer of intellectual property involving national security. It was implemented on the date of issuance.
On January 11, the Shenzhen Intermediate Court announced its decisions to grant Huawei’s injunctive relief and place permanent injunction on Samsung’s 4G handsets after the court found Samsung infringed on Huawei’s 4G Standard Essential Patents.
On February 28, the Beijing IP Court (“IP Court”) issued a decision in Qilu Pharmaceutical v. the PRB ((2017)京73行初字No. 5365), which reversed a ruling by the Patent Reexamination Board (“PRB”) that upholds the validity of Patent No. 200910176994.1 (the “’994 patent”) owned by Beijing Sihuan Pharmaceutical (“Sihuan”). The IP Court holds that the inauthentic experimental data presented in the original description result in the failure to satisfy the enablement requirement.
China has three types of patents, i.e., invention, utility model, and design. The utility model patent does not have the counterpart in some other jurisdictions such as the USA, so some essential aspects of the utility model patent will be introduced below for better understanding of it.
On December 20, 2017, in the Patent Reexamination Board of SIPO (PRB) v. Beijing Winsunny Harmony Science & Technology Co., Ltd. ((2016)最高法行再41号), the Supreme Court held that a Markush claim, when drawn to a class of chemical compounds, should be interpreted as a set of Markush elements rather than a set of independent specific compounds. The present case is a petition for retrial filed by the PRB, requesting the Supreme Court to review the second-instance decision made by the Beijing High People’s Court (“High Court”). In reversing the PRB’s decision in the invalidation proceedings instituted by Beijing Winsunny Harmony Science & Technology Co., Ltd. (“Winsunny”), the High Court recognized a Markush claim as claiming a set of parallel technical solutions.
Abstract: Currently “common knowledge" has become a hot topic in academic research. How to correctly determine common knowledge has become the key to improve the quality of patent examination. This paper introduces the availability bias theory to point out that the common knowledge determining process tends to produce availability bias, give too much weight to the easily conceived technical knowledge, and turn a blind eye to a lot of other information that must be considered, leading to errors in determining common knowledge. In patent examination, the availability of parts, the availability of work methods and the availability of technical problems may lead to the availability bias. In the end, the countermeasures is put forward.