Recently, after receiving the (2018) Supreme Court Complaint No. 3451 Civil Ruling from the Supreme People’s Court, the IP team of ZhongYin (Shenzhen) Law Firm has successfully represented Shanghai PIONEO Glasses Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Yimingxing Glasses Co., Ltd. Company on petition for retrial before the Supreme People's Court and gotten it approved.

Shanghai PIONEO Glasses Company and Shenzhen Yimingxing Company refused to accept the (2018) Yue Civil Final No. 44 Civil Judgment made by the Guangdong Higher People's Court and intended to entrust ZhongYin (Shenzhen) to petition for a retrial. Upon taking the entrustment and analysis and research, ZhongYin (Shenzhen) believed that: since the patent holder Hong Kong Sun Hing Glasses Company excluded the technical feature that "it can still be used normally without the pull-down piece" in the invalidation proceeding and the accused product could still be used normally after the pull-down piece was removed, the alleged infringing product was different from the patented technical solution in suit; in this case, the principle of "prosecution history estoppel" should be applied to determine that the alleged infringing product did not fall within the scope of protection of the patent in suit. In the process of petitioning for retrial, the IP team of ZhongYin (Shenzhen) did not stop the attempt to invalidate the patent in suit. Through its efforts, it also convinced the Patent Reexamination Board of the China National Intellectual Property Administration to make a reexamination decision to declare all the patent invalid.

By upholding the spirit of craftsmanship “engagement, excellence, diligence and refinement”, the IP team of ZhongYin (Shenzhen) actively petitioned for a retrial before the Supreme People's Court and gets it approved, wining a retrial opportunity for Shanghai PIONEO Glasses Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Yimingxing Glasses Co., Ltd.. There is no precedent for ruling on whether the patent holder's comment on the comparison document in the invalidation proceeding will affect the scope of patent protection in this case. It is expected that the Supreme People's Court will make an authoritative ruling on this issue as soon as possible.