Recently, the Shenzhen Intellectual Property Court rendered its first instance judgment in a design patent infringement dispute wherein Liu Shen represented a well known German optical equipment enterprise as the plaintiff. All of the plaintiff’s claims were fully upheld by the court. This case stands as a rare exemplary ruling in the ophthalmic vision testing equipment sector where punitive damages were fully awarded without notarized physical evidence of the infringing product. The judicial decision has fully safeguarded the legitimate intellectual property rights and interests of the foreign right holder.
The product at issue is a video based central positioning device for human eye vision testing. Boasting a futuristic appearance, the device enjoys high industry recognition and market acceptance within the ophthalmic medical testing equipment space. Multiple market players produced wholesale copies of the patented design, severely disrupting the plaintiff’s business layout and brand market order in China. Accordingly, the German enterprise retained the Liu Shen team to launch serial intellectual property enforcement proceedings in China.
Two core issues formed the focal points of contention during trial: first, whether the defendant had engaged in the manufacture of the accused infringing product; second, whether the plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages for patent infringement should be sustained. Substantial evidential hurdles existed in this matter: physical evidence of the accused infringing product could not be secured via conventional notarized purchase. Faced with this procedural bottleneck, the Liu Shen team devised a multi layered composite evidence gathering strategy. Evidence was compiled from multiple dimensions including administrative filing records, online promotional materials, trade show documentation, and witness statements from the defendant’s business counterparties. Corroboration across diverse sources built a complete chain of proof that solidly established the defendant’s large scale manufacture of the infringing articles.
Meanwhile, our team produced sufficient evidence addressing the two statutory prerequisites for punitive damages: the defendant’s subjective intent to infringe and the scale of the infringing conduct. Evidence showed the defendant had outright copied both the product design and promotional materials, and admitted prior knowledge of the asserted patent — directly proving willful subjective intent for infringement. Sales figures published via the defendant’s official channels and repeated product exhibitions further corroborated that the infringement was large scale and aggravated in nature. Based on the full body of facts and evidence of the case, the Shenzhen Intellectual Property Court applied punitive damages provisions and granted the full amount of the plaintiff’s claims totaling RMB 500,000, notwithstanding the absence of notarized physical infringing goods.
This ruling underscore the market empowering value of design patents for innovative products. It vividly exemplifies China’s judicial principles for rigorous intellectual property protection: equal protection for both Chinese and foreign parties, expeditious resolution of disputes, and stringent sanctions against infringement. The case breaks the entrenched practice assumption that punitive damages cannot apply without notarized physical product evidence. It affirms the judicial weight of closed loop circumstantial evidence in intellectual property litigation and delivers a valuable precedent for similar cases involving covert manufacturing led patent infringement. Furthermore, as a landmark cross border IP enforcement matter, it demonstrates China’s judiciary applies impartial protection equally to domestic and foreign invested market participants. It sends a clear signal to international stakeholders regarding China’s continuous improvement of a law based business environment and strengthened IP protection for foreign invested enterprises. Moving forward, Liu Shen & Associates will continue to leverage its professional strengths in patent litigation, complex evidence procurement, and punitive damages disputes. We provide full stack, custom tailored intellectual property enforcement services for domestic and overseas clients spanning science technology innovation, medical devices and high end manufacturing sectors. We assist market participants in mitigating IP infringement risks and underpin the realization and commercialization of innovations.
The case was handled by QIU Jun, XU Ruiqiao and WU Hongyu. Attorney WANG Wen also aided on the case.
