Lawyer’s Insights: In some transnational infringement cases, the initial information obtained about the allegedly infringing product often only includes the trademark, without manufacturer information. In this situation, selecting and identifying the defendant becomes a practical challenge. Theoretically, one could sue the trademark holder outside the country, but this is problematic because it makes it difficult to prove that the actual manufacturing of the allegedly infringing product took place within the country. Furthermore, all foreign evidence and documents require notarization and authentication, significantly increasing procedural complexity and cost.
At this point, it’s necessary to search the sales channels of the allegedly infringing product, especially publicly available online channels, where the necessary evidence can often be obtained. In the initial stages of this case, the client expended considerable effort without obtaining manufacturer information. Based on his deep understanding of the industry, Attorney Yu Chunbo found a sales link for the allegedly infringing product on a cross-border e-commerce website, with the manufacturer’s factory name implicitly appearing in the attachments. The allegedly infringing product was purchased through notarization, and the entire purchase process and website information were notarized, thus identifying a branch company within the country as the defendant in the infringement case.
Parties:
Plaintiff (Client): Luxshare Precision Industry Co., Ltd.
Defendant: Anmou (Chengdu) Co., Ltd.
Basic Facts: Luxshare Precision Industry Co., Ltd. discovered that its invention patent right had been infringed and intended to file a civil lawsuit on the grounds of infringement of one of its invention patent rights, but the evidence of infringement was incomplete. After representing the client in this rights protection case, Attorney Yu Chunbo first assisted the client in notarizing the purchase of the infringing product. Given that the actual manufacturer of the infringing product had more than one hundred branches in China, making it impossible to pinpoint a specific defendant, key evidence was obtained and solidified through evidence retrieval. Subsequently, based on the existing evidence, an administrative investigation was initiated. After the administrative department completed its evidence collection, the administrative investigation application was withdrawn, and a civil lawsuit was filed. Through a series of clear and swift rights protection measures, the defendant proactively sought a settlement, fully realizing the client’s commercial interests.
Document Number: (2022) Hu 73 Zhi Min Chu 887