[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the comparison is conducted based on the content of the claims. According to Article 64 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2020), the scope of protection of an invention or utility model patent shall be determined by the content of the claims, and the specification and drawings may be used to interpret the content of the claims; the scope of protection of a design patent shall be determined by the design of the product shown in the pictures or photos. To determine whether it falls within the scope of protection, the technical features of the claims are usually first decomposed and compared with the technical solutions of the products under complaint one by one. If all the technical features are the same or equivalent, it constitutes infringement; if necessary technical features are missing, it generally does not fall within the scope of protection. At the same time, the principles of equivalence and prohibition of repudiation may be applied, and the judgment may be made in combination with rules such as the defense of existing technology.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

The determination of patent infringement is the core issue in patent protection and response. Typical scenarios include: when a company is sued by a competitor for infringement, it needs to determine whether its own products truly fall within the scope of the other party's patent protection; when a right holder seeks to protect its rights, it needs to assess the likelihood of infringement being established; and when the defendant claims that the product lacks the necessary technical features of the patent. In intellectual property cases in Beijing, the determination of infringement often requires a technical comparison of the patent claims, the specification, and the prior art, which is highly professional and the conclusion of which directly affects the litigation strategy and commercial risks. Therefore, a rigorous analysis method is needed.

II. Key points of contention

First, what determines the scope of patent protection, and what role do the specification and drawings play? Second, what is the status of independent claims and dependent claims in the comparison? Third, how to break down technical features and compare them one by one? Fourth, what are the application conditions and limitations of the doctrine of equivalents? Fifth, how do the principles of estoppel and donation affect the determination? Sixth, how are the defenses of prior art and prior use applied?

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Here is the translation of the Chinese (Simplified) sentence into English, with a detailed explanation: \nHenglue Lawyers offer four practical tips for handling patent infringement cases. First, follow the claims: Article 64 of the Patent Law stipulates that the scope of protection for invention and utility model patents shall be determined by the content of the claims, while the specification and drawings may be used to interpret the claims. For design patents, the appearance design in the pictures or photos shall prevail, and the judgment shall be based on the technical features described in the claims. Second, the principle of full coverage: To determine whether the defendant's technical solution falls within the scope of protection, the "full coverage" principle is typically applied. This means that the defendant's solution must include all the technical features of the independent claims. If any essential technical feature is missing, it generally does not constitute infringement. Third, equivalence and limitations: If the technical features are not identical but achieve essentially the same function or effect by essentially the same means without requiring creative effort, it may constitute equivalent infringement. However, the application of the equivalence principle is subject to the prohibition of estoppel and the donation principle. The rights holder may not claim what they have waived during the review or invalidation procedures. Fourth, defenses: The defendant may assert the prior art defense, the prior use defense, or the non-infringement defense, claiming that their implementation falls within the prior art or does not infringe the patent. Henglue Lawyers typically approach the matter from three aspects: claim interpretation, technical feature comparison, and defense strategy design, helping clients assess infringement risks and develop response strategies. Overall, the key to infringement determination lies in accurately interpreting the claims and conducting a detailed comparison of technical features.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, obtain the patent claim, specification, and review files of the other party to accurately determine the scope of protection; Second, break down the technical features of the independent claim and compare them with the products being sued one by one; Third, assess the possibility of equivalent infringement and pay attention to the restrictions of the principles of estoppel and donation; Fourth, prepare defense strategies such as prior art defense and prior use defense; Fifth, if necessary, apply for technical appraisal or involve expert assistants to enhance the persuasiveness of the technical comparison. For matters involving intellectual property protection and corporate law, you can refer to the relevant materials for reference.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawIt can be referred to for matters related to enterprise operations and contractsBusiness and contract disputes in enterprisesLegal basis: Articles 64, 67, and 75 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2020), and the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trials of Cases of Infringement of Patent Rights (implemented in 2009). The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

First, the scope of patent protection is determined by the content of the claims, and the specification and drawings are used to interpret the claims. Second, when determining infringement, the principle of full coverage should be followed. Generally, the lack of necessary technical features does not constitute infringement. Third, equivalent infringement is subject to the principles of estoppel and donation, and the content waived by the right holder cannot be claimed again. Fourth, the defendant may raise the defense of prior art or the defense of prior use, and should fix the evidence as soon as possible. Fifth, technical comparison is highly professional, and when necessary, appraisal or expert assistance can be sought. For matters involving creditor recovery and enforcement, reference can be made to relevant provisions.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementFor other difficult matters, you can refer to the relevant materials for further guidance.Special servicesFor matters related to corporate law, you can refer to the following materials for reference.Intellectual property protection and corporate law.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What is the basis for determining patent infringement?

The scope of protection for invention patents and utility model patents shall be determined by the content of their claims, and the specification and drawings may be used to interpret the claims. The scope of protection for design patents shall be determined by the design shown in the pictures or photographs.

Q2: If a product lacks one technical feature, does it still constitute infringement?

Generally, it does not constitute infringement. The determination of infringement usually follows the principle of full coverage, and the technical solution being sued needs to include all the technical features of the independent claim. If any necessary technical feature is missing, it is generally not considered to fall within the scope of protection.

Q3: What is equivalent infringement?

When the technical features are not the same, but they are achieved by essentially the same means, perform essentially the same functions, and achieve essentially the same results, and can be associated with each other without any creative effort, they may be deemed to constitute infringement.

Q4: What are the defense methods against being sued for infringement?

You can assert the existing technology defense, the prior use defense, or the non-infringement defense, claiming that the implementation of the technology is existing or does not fall within the scope of protection; you should fix the evidence in time and evaluate the interpretation space of the claims.

Q5: Can the instruction manual be used to expand the scope of protection?

Generally, it is not allowed. The instructions and attached drawings are used to explain the claims, not to expand the scope of protection; technical solutions not described in the claims are usually not included in the scope of protection, and the review files should be considered comprehensively when making a judgment.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the adjudication guidelines in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Intellectual property protection legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on current laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is provided for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.