All three U.S. patents filed against Dajiang are invalid!

category:Hot
 All three U.S. patents filed against Dajiang are invalid!


[global network UAV comprehensive report] on May 22, Finnegan, a US law firm, said that its agency, the International Trade Commission of the US Department of Commerce (ITC), had made important progress in the investigation of Shenzhen Dajiang and a number of related entities (hereinafter referred to as Dajiang) in accordance with Article 337, and the relevant claims in the three patents alleged to be infringed by Dajiang had ended in Beijing All of them were declared invalid on the night of May 21. As a result, Dajiangs operations and sales in the United States were not affected by the 337 survey, which lasted nearly two years.

The reporter asked Dajiang for confirmation on this news, and Dajiang confirmed that the information was true, and didnt make any more comments.

According to earlier reports, this case was initiated by Shenzhen daotongs U.S. subsidiary autelrobotics to ITC on August 30, 2018. ITC began to investigate on October 2, 2018, according to three patents claimed by autel (U.S. patent numbers: us79174, us9260184 and us10044013). According to the law firm, with these three patents, autel tried to prevent Dajiang from selling UAVs with intelligent operation (such as obstacle avoidance) (patent 174), motor paddle blade (patent 184) or battery clamped on the UAV (patent 013) in the United States.

During the investigation, Dajiang pointed out many problems in the case, the law firm said. On March 2, 2020, chief administrative judge (calj) Bullock issued a preliminary ruling (ID) in favor of Xinjiang. Calj determined in ID that Dajiang did not infringe 174 patent, and daotong did not have any domestic industrial practice related to 174 patent. At the same time, the patent 174 is expected or obvious by the prior art, and the judge holds that the claim belongs to an abstract concept and does not meet the requirements of 35u. S.c. u00a7 101, so it is invalid. Calj determined that many of the alleged DJI products did not infringe the 184 patent right, and he also determined that the 013 patent claim was invalid based on several reasons.

ITC is currently deciding whether to audit the ID of calj. In the opinion of the firm, it is unlikely that the Commission will enforce any exclusion or prohibition order based on the three invalid patents. Therefore, Dajiangs operations and sales in the United States will not be affected by the 337 survey.

According to reports, Feihan law firm of the United States, which released the information, on behalf of Xinjiang, responded to the 337 investigation. In addition, K & s law firm of the United States, on behalf of Xinjiang innovation, participated in the bilateral review of us10044013 and us9260184 patents.

(function(){( window.slotbydup=window .slotbydup||[]).push({id:u5811557,container:ssp_ 5811557, async:true });}) (); source: Global Times - global network editor in charge: Yao Wenguang_ NN1682