直管燈專利被侵權案,嘉興蔡祖泉勝訴÷"♥,獲賠超2000萬美(měi)元
文(wén)章(zhāng)來(lái)源: 高(gāo)工(gōng)LED
發布時(shí)間(jiān): 2022-08-15
閱讀(dú):9993 次

嘉興蔡祖泉照明公司維權成功,獲賠超210≈ 0萬美(měi)元。

近(jìn)日(rì),美(měi)國(guó)德州法院法官就(→βjiù)LED照(zhào)明(míng)領域美(měi)國(g§ uó)得(de)州法院專利訴訟案件(jiàn)(案号CAS♠€ ★E NO.6:20-CV-00018-AD★π↑£A;原告:嘉興蔡祖泉照明公司與Obert In☆∑c.;被告:晨輝光(guāng)寶、紹興‍σ 瑞新照(zhào)明(míng)、美(měi•≥ β)國(guó)Elliott Electric Supply Inc.),做(zuò)出判決(Entry of J÷€σudgment),判定CH在故意侵權的(de)時(shí)間>♣↕£(jiān)內(nèi),加重一(yī)♣×✔Ω倍的(de)損害賠償,因此,CH須付給蔡祖泉的(de)損害賠償總金(jīn)額約為(w↕§èi)2121萬美(měi)元(約1.43億元人(rén)民(mΩ₩ ín)币)。


此前,2021年(nián)11月(yuè)的(d↕€γ★e)陪審團裁定被告侵犯原告的(de)美(měi)國(guó)專利US 9,939,≠×140、US 10,352,540和(hé)US←€•‍ 10,295,125,專利有(yǒu)↓®效,且被告晨輝光(guāng)寶、紹興瑞新照(zhào)明(míng)(兩者合稱C≈$ΩH)的(de)産品(包括Type A,Type B,包含使用(yòng)了÷₽(le)明(míng)石LT2600系列IC的(d'σe)雙端type-B産品)全部成立故意侵權,詳見(jiàn)判決書(shū)附件(jiàn)


此外(wài),Elliott須就(jiùαφ)其銷售(詳見(jiàn)判決書(shū)附件(jiàn))其他(tā)非CH制(zhì)造的(de)産品負擔侵害賠償約30萬美​‌∑(měi)元的(de)賠償。法官尚未就(jiù)陪審團♣Ωσγ判定後的(de)侵權行(xíng)為(wèi)±>₩¶進行(xíng)賠償金(jīn)的(de)判定,是(shì)以¶<被告須負擔更多(duō)的(de)損害賠償(也(yě)就(jiù)是(s€≠→♥hì)2021/10/11以後持續銷售的(de)₽≠✔侵權品,将另作(zuò)計(jì)算(suàn))≥$↑。


法官在判決意見(jiàn)書(shū)中細數(shù)CH故意侵權的(de)¥​事(shì)迹,并且判定加重一(yī)倍的(de​≤)損害賠償。這(zhè)也(yě)是(shì)該法官首次做(zuò)出的<γ≥(de)加重損害賠償判決。這(zhè)些(xiē)©♥被法官列舉的(de)事(shì)迹包含:(摘錄自(zì)判決意見(jiàn)書☆π♣₩(shū),請(qǐng)自(zì)行(xíng)對(duì)照(z±€✔hào)參考)


(1)CH在知(zhī)悉蔡祖泉專利後,除了(le)在大(dà)約202ε×↓<0/11/12聘雇訴訟律師(shī)外(wài)無其他(tā)作(zuò←ε'♣)為(wèi)(”They took no action otherε✔ than to retain litigati§≥∑∞on counsel for this case on or ab♠↓↑σout November 12,2020.”);


(2)毫無争議(yì)的(de),CH持有(yǒu)原告山(≤α‌shān)蒲的(de)機(jī)密文(wén)件(jiàn)(”It is undisputed tha&‌ t CH possesses confidentialΩΩ•> testing report on Super Light∑™<εing tubes and a comparison of Super•'≥ Lighting and CH tubes.”);


(3)CH在證據調查程序中對於何時知(zhī)悉山(σ®↕¥shān)蒲專利一(yī)事(shì),一(yī)★πε直閃爍其辭,但(dàn)最終仍被一(yī)份中文(wén)意見Ω$ ∑(jiàn)書(shū)給揭發出來(lái),CH确實早就(jiù)知(ε→zhī)悉其産品的(de)潛在侵權風(fēn ≥g)險(”Defendants never substantively res£™✘∑ponded to Plaintiffs’discovery request®‍≥s regarding Defendants’awareness of t≈☆he Asserted Patents and any✔π∞ steps Defendants took ÷™← once they gained that awareneδ>π←ss.The existence of the Chinese≈≤ opinion does suggest tha★ ↓ t CH and Ruising were aware and co↕↕ncerned of the potential risks thφ ≤e Asserted Patents posed ♥ ♠to Defendants’products.”)≤↓;


(4)江清波(CH重要(yào)幹部)與其代理(lǐ)律師(shī)Radule≠☆scu在2021年(nián)5月(yuè)曲解法官♦₩©φ的(de)裁定意旨,公開(kāi)地(dì)在微(wēi)信上(shàng)與★♥¶網絡上(shàng)發表不(bù)當新聞稿意圖貶損山(s☆∑★hān)蒲,自(zì)恃代替法官未審先判(”This Court,granted Defendant≤ ∏s leave to amend their "  answer to Super Lighting↔$’s complaint.Yet Jack Jiang took δ£λto WeChat,a popular social plat§↔€form in China,and described that rul λing as an“acknowledgement that[Super ∏© ✘Lighting’s]patents were acq♣γβuired illegally.”“That is a misrepr¶<∏esentation of this court’s order. ↓≠”“Jack and his counsel at Radulescu a∞ε€↓lso issued a press release… ₹≤✔”);


(5)法官也(yě)采信CH和(hé)嘉興山(shān)•✘λ蒲之間(jiān)的(de)競争猛烈,以緻于CH提出不(bù)尋常的(de)←&豐厚待遇把江清波從(cóng)蔡祖泉挖到(dào)CH公§‍司,更甚者,CH被起出了(le)嘉興山(sh↑$ān)蒲的(de)機(jī)密文(wén)檔。(”The Court is persuaded that t&'he competition betwe✔ en Super Lighting anε£ ✘d CH is fierce;it drove CH to poaδ☆≤→ch Jack Jiang from Super Lig¥ ↕★hting by offering“unusually large ₹ benefits.”“Moreover,CH produced Sup"↔‌er Lighting’s confidential do →Ωcuments”)。


蔡祖泉照明在美(měi)國(±φ↓±guó)多(duō)年(nián)的(de)≤£¶經營宗旨是(shì)誠信并尊重知(zhī)識₩✔♣δ産權,而且為(wèi)創造和(hé)諧的(de)營商環∑α境在一(yī)直努力著(zhe),訴訟是(shì)不(bù)得(de)已♠ ‌∞而為(wèi)之的(de)事(shì)情,也(yě)衷心希望各界₹∞能(néng)夠尊重知(zhī)識産權,在市(shì←✔λ★)場(chǎng)上(shàng)形成公平的(de)競÷←争的(de)氛圍,期盼各方提出自(zì)己的(de)創新并以最優質Ω←×£的(de)産品來(lái)服務消費(fèi)者。對≈→π(duì)于蔡祖泉的(de)發明(míng)或外$β(wài)觀專利有(yǒu)興趣深入了(le↓¥✘)解的(de),可(kě)以到(dào)訪:http://j™σx.super-lamps.com/patent/;該網站(zhàn)每月©≥©(yuè)都(dōu)會(huì)更新被實£↔♣質審查過的(de)各國(guó)發明(m☆€γ☆íng)或外(wài)觀專利信息,便于同業(yè)↕ε或經銷商分(fēn)析,而更好(hǎo)的(de)尊重專利、開(kā₹‍¶↓i)展業(yè)務并取得(de)成功。