论文部分内容阅读
“苹果专利案”中,公共利益的判断导致联邦法院授予预先禁令的过程一波三折。而确立授予预先禁令四要件的“温特案”中,对公共利益冲突的处理导致联邦法院在预先禁令的授予上先后作出五次不同判决。中国的诉前禁令制度与美国预先禁令制度类似,以联邦法院的司法实践为参照,从正当程序的角度出发,建议从以下几个方面完善中国专利案件的诉前禁令制度:首先,将公共利益的判断作为授予诉前禁令的要件之一;其次,将听证程序作为授予诉前禁令的强制程序;第三,完善复议程序和有关时效的规定。
“Apple patent case ”, the judgment of the public interest led to the twilight of federal court granting pre-ban. The establishment of a “Winterthur” case that prescribes the four elements of the preemptive injunction, which addressed the conflict of public interest, led to five different sentences before the Federal Court in awarding the preliminary injunction. China’s pre-trial injunction system is similar to that of the United States pre-prohibition system. Based on the judicial practice of the Federal Court, China’s pre-trial injunction system is proposed to improve the pre-trial injunction system of China’s patent cases from the following aspects: Firstly, As a prerequisite to grant a pre-appeal injunction; secondly, the hearing process as a mandatory procedure for granting pre-appeal injunction; third, to improve the review process and the relevant provisions of the statute of limitations.