本案例是实用新型专利侵权纠纷。专利产品为煤矿用局部通风机消声装置,争议的主要部件,一个是环形滤波器,一个是圆形消声片,名称不同,材质有差异,而且被告以“现有技术”抗辩。一审法院认为侵权不成立,判决原告败诉,二审法院认为侵权成立,撤销一审判决。两审法院对客观事实的认定相同,分歧在于对法律的理解和适用,对事实性质的判断。
<<This case is utility model patent infringement dispute. The patented product is the muffler device for local ventilator used in coal mine. The disputed parts are called ring filter and round muffler,with different names and different materials,and the defendant argues with “prior art”. The court of first instance held that the infringement was not established,ruling that the plaintiff lost the lawsuit,while the court of second instance held that the infringement was established. The two trial courts have the same determination of the objective facts,but the difference lies in the understanding and application of the law and the judgment of the nature of the facts.
<<