Typical Cases by Attorney Yu Chunbo (Compiled February 8, 2026)
Case Summary:
In intellectual property infringement disputes, the plaintiff should fully consider the stability of intellectual property rights to avoid losing the basis for their rights during litigation. Conversely, if the defendant can prove that their rights does not exist, they can achieve a decisive victory. For the petitioner in a patent invalidation case, the most important thing is to obtain high-quality evidence.
Document Numbers:
(2024) Qian 01 Zhi Min Chu No. 16 Civil Ruling
(2023) Qian 2301 Min Chu No. 12620-3 Lifting of Preservation Ruling
No. 582317 Decision on Examination of Invalidation Request
Parties:
Plaintiff/Patentee: Li Yimou
Defendant/Invalidation Requester: Xingyi City Kelibang Network Technology Co., Ltd.
Defendants: Qianxinan Prefecture Kelibang Machinery Co., Ltd., Kelibang (Yunnan) Technology Co., Ltd., Wang Moumou, Li Mouer, Zhao Moumou, Chen Moumou, Li Mousan
Basic Facts:
Plaintiff Li Yimou is the patentee of a utility model patent entitled “Layered Drum Dryer,” patent number ZL201920042427.6. In 2024, Li Yimou filed a lawsuit with the Guiyang Intermediate People’s Court, requesting: 1. That the defendants immediately cease patent infringement and stop manufacturing and selling the infringing products; 2. That the defendants compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of RMB 6,702,500 and reasonable expenses of RMB 129,000; totaling RMB 6,831,500; 3. That the defendants bear the litigation costs, notary fees, preservation fees, preservation insurance fees, and attorney fees. While filing the lawsuit, Li applied to the court for property preservation, securing a total of 6,831,500 yuan in assets belonging to the eight defendants.
The defendants retained the Yu Chunbo Law Team to handle the dispute. The Team immediately conducted an evidence search regarding the patents in question. Upon finding strong evidence, they filed a patent invalidation request with the State Intellectual Property Office, requesting the patent rights be declared entirely invalid. After an oral hearing, the State Intellectual Property Office declared the patents in question entirely invalid. Based on this, the court of first instance dismissed the plaintiff’s claims.
Lawyer’s Insights:
In intellectual property infringement disputes, intellectual property rights are the foundation of the civil rights for filing a lawsuit. The plaintiff should fully consider the stability of intellectual property rights to avoid losing their legal basis during litigation. Conversely, if the defendant can prove that the legal basis does not exist, they can achieve a decisive victory. If the plaintiff loses their legal basis during the course of the civil case, the court will usually dismiss the plaintiff’s lawsuit.
In patent invalidation cases, as the requester, the most important thing is to find high-quality evidence and establish a solid basis for successful invalidation. Based on the evidence, achieving the invalidation goal also requires elaborating on the reasons for patent invalidation based on the evidence and clearly explaining this during the oral invalidation hearing. Especially during the oral hearing, when faced with the opposing patent attorney’s rebuttals, it is crucial to maintain our invalidation arguments while effectively responding to the opposing party’s objections, fully demonstrating that the invalidation of the patent in question is justified and well-founded. In this case, an invalidation decision was made just three days after the oral hearing, fully demonstrating the overwhelming advantage of the evidence and the oral hearing process.