In the invalidation procedure of the subject patent, in view of the fact that its corresponding EP patent has been nullified by the same petitioner, the patentee expressed that it would be even acceptable as long as the procedure is completed shortly before the term of patent is terminated.

  However, the team of YUHUA UNITED keenly found that core evidence submitted by the petitioner may be inadmissible in view of the related requirements on evidence formed abroad. Therefore, the team adopted a special strategy, and pointed out the evidence cannot be allowed during the oral hearing. In the end, the Collegiate Panel supported the team’s opinion, and declared that the evidence cannot be used in the invalidation procedure, Thus the patent right was completely maintained.

  One year later, the same petitioner initiated another invalidation procedure, eliminating the previous error. However, the team ofYUHUA UNITED still found another formal error concerning the core evidence. During the oral hearing, the team again challenged the admissibility of the evidence, and the Collegiate Panel again supported the team’s opinion, and declared that the evidence cannot be used in the invalidation procedure. Therefore, the patent right was completely maintained for the second time.

  Even if a third invalidation request is filed, the patent term would expire. The patentee is very satisfied with the team’s professional work.