[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, it is necessary to prepare evidence to prove the existence of prior art that was disclosed before the application date, focusing on the novelty and inventiveness of the patent. According to the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2020) and related regulations, those who request the invalidation of a patent must submit evidence to prove that the patent lacks novelty, inventiveness, or fails to meet other authorization conditions. Common types of evidence include patent documents disclosed before the application date, journal papers, books, product manuals and sales promotion materials, publicly used physical objects and images, exhibition materials, and publicly available online information. The core of the evidence lies in proving that the disclosure occurred before the patent application date or priority date, and that the disclosed content sufficiently and clearly discloses the relevant technical solutions. For online information and physical evidence, it is recommended to promptly notarize or preserve them to enhance their probative force. When combining multiple pieces of evidence, it is necessary to explain the technical inspiration derived from their combined use.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

The declaration of patent invalidity is an important procedure for patent rights confirmation, and the adequacy of evidence preparation directly determines the outcome. In practice, petitioners often fail to succeed due to difficulties in proving the disclosure time of evidence, incomplete disclosure content, or defects in the form of evidence. When handling such cases in the Beijing area, the collegial panel will review the authenticity of the evidence, the disclosure time and content, and determine whether it meets the criteria of novelty and inventiveness based on the claims. Therefore, petitioners should conduct systematic searches and fix evidence before filing a declaration of invalidity, and respondents should also prepare corresponding statements of opinion and counter-evidence. The disclosure time and authenticity of evidence are the focus of review, and systematic searches and timely preservation are particularly crucial.

II. Key points of contention

There are four key points that need to be clarified: Firstly, the authorization conditions that the evidence needs to prove, mainly novelty and creativity; Secondly, the method of proving the disclosure time; Thirdly, the form of evidence and authenticity requirements, whether it needs to be notarized or require the original; Fourthly, the technical inspiration description when using multiple pieces of evidence together. Generally speaking, the evidence for invalidation declaration focuses on the disclosure time and disclosure content. Evidence that is authentic in form, complete in content, and presented first in time is more convincing. Whether the evidence is sufficient directly affects whether the invalidation request can be established. Parties should provide evidence around the disclosure time and technical disclosure.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

When handling patent invalidation and ownership confirmation cases, Henglue Lawyers typically focus on evidence preparation from four aspects. First, search and screening: Search for all technical features of the claim and screen out prior art documents or physical evidence that disclose the technical solution in full and have a publication date earlier than the application date. Second, fixation of publication time: Prove the publication time through methods such as document publication pages, journal issue numbers, website archives, sales invoices, and exhibition materials; and promptly notarize or apply for preservation of online information and physical evidence. Third, review of evidence form: Prioritize the use of originals or notarized and certified copies to avoid being excluded due to doubts about authenticity; and pay attention to handling the corresponding certification procedures for overseas evidence. Fourth, combined argumentation: When evaluating the creativity of multiple pieces of evidence, explain the technical inspiration and rationality of the combination between the evidence and demonstrate that technical personnel in the field have the motivation to combine them. In practice, the proof of publication time and the perfection of evidence form are key to whether the invalidation request can be supported.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, conduct a thorough search before requesting a declaration of invalidity to identify the prior art with an earlier publication time; Second, pay attention to fixing the publication time and promptly notarizing or preserving online and physical evidence; Third, prioritize submitting original or notarized and certified evidence, and handle the corresponding formalities for overseas evidence; Fourth, when combining multiple pieces of evidence, fully explain the technical inspiration and motivation behind the combination. For matters involving intellectual property protection, you may refer to the relevant guidelines.Intellectual property protection and corporate complianceFor contract and commercial disputes, you can refer to the following resources for reference:Business and contract disputes in enterprisesLegal basis: The Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2020) and relevant provisions on the declaration of invalidity of patent rights and prior art. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial decisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

Firstly, the evidence for invalidation is prepared based on novelty and creativity. Secondly, the focus is on proving that the disclosure date is earlier than the application date or the priority date. Thirdly, the evidence must be authentic and complete, and online and physical evidence should be preserved through notarization. Fourthly, when using multiple pieces of evidence, it is necessary to explain the technical inspiration they provide together. For matters involving intellectual property protection, it can be handled through legal procedures.Intellectual property protection and corporate complianceThe service is supported, and you can refer to it when handling difficult and complex casesSpecial servicesColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: How should one prepare the evidence for a declaration of patent invalidation?

Regarding novelty and creativity, prepare evidence of existing technologies that were disclosed before the application date. The key is to prove that the disclosure occurred before the application date or the priority date, and that the disclosed content fully and clearly discloses the relevant technical solutions. Common evidence includes patent documents, journal papers, product manuals, sales materials, and physical objects that have been publicly used. Online and physical evidence should be notarized or preserved.

Q2: Which evidence is the most useful?

These are usually types of documentary evidence that correspond to the technical features of the claims, have a clear disclosure time, and provide complete disclosure information, such as patent documents from authorization announcements, journal papers, and books. Product manuals, sales invoices, exhibition materials, and evidence of public use can be used to prove public use. Multiple pieces of evidence can be combined to evaluate creativity, but the technical inspiration provided by the combination must be explained.

Q3: How to prove the public disclosure time?

This can be proven through the publication information of the document, the issue number of the journal, the archived records of the website, sales invoices and contracts, exhibition materials, etc. Online information can be notarized or fixed with a trusted timestamp; physical evidence can be preserved or notarized. The clearer the disclosure time and the more standard the form, the stronger the probative force will be.

Q4: Do I need to get it notarized?

It's not always necessary, but for evidence that is easily questioned or easily lost, such as online information, emails, and physical evidence, notarization or preservation can significantly enhance the probative force. Evidence obtained abroad also needs to go through the certification procedures according to relevant regulations. When submitting the evidence, it's best to provide the original or a copy that has been notarized and authenticated, to avoid being disqualified due to issues with authenticity.

Q5: What should we pay attention to when combining evidence?

When evaluating the creativity of a combination, it is necessary to explain the technical features disclosed in each piece of evidence, why ordinary skilled technicians in the field would have the motivation to combine them, and whether the combined solution covers the technical scheme described in the claims. It is important to avoid simply listing the evidence without explaining the technical inspiration behind the combination, as this may result in the argument being deemed insufficient and therefore not being accepted.

The above content is based on the compilation of judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglu Law Firm for specific situations.

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

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is 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. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.