How should patent disputes be resolved?

2) Disputes over ownership of patent rights; 3) Disputes concerning contracts for assignment of patent rights or patent application rights; 4) Patent infringement disputes; 5) Disputes involving counterfeiting of others’ patents; 6) Disputes over reasonable fees for use of an invention after publication of a patent application but before grant of the patent; 7) Disputes over rewards and remuneration; 8) Pre-trial applications for injunctions against infringement or for property preservation; 9) Disputes over inventor or designer qualification; 10) Disputes arising from dissatisfaction with administrative decisions made by patent administration departments—including dissatisfaction with the Patent Reexamination Board’s decision upholding a rejection of a patent application, dissatisfaction with the Patent Reexamination Board’s decision on a request for invalidation of a patent right, dissatisfaction with the State Intellectual Property Office’s decision granting a compulsory license, and dissatisfaction with the State Intellectual Property Office’s ruling on royalties for a compulsory license; 11) Other patent-related disputes. III. Handling and Resolution of Patent Disputes 1) Administrative Mediation Administrative mediation refers to a dispute-resolution activity conducted under the auspices of an administrative organ, based on the voluntary participation of both parties, grounded in laws, regulations, and policies, and aimed at persuading and guiding the disputing parties toward mutual understanding, compromise, and equal negotiation to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. Patent disputes eligible for administrative mediation include: — Disputes over ownership of patent applications and patent rights; — Disputes over inventor or designer qualification; — Disputes over rewards and remuneration for inventors or designers of service inventions; — Disputes over failure to pay appropriate fees for use of an invention after publication of a patent application but before grant of the patent; — Other patent-related disputes.

Exploration of the Mediation Pathway for Resolving Intellectual Property Disputes

As professional legal service providers, lawyers act from their clients’ perspectives to deliver comprehensive legal services and help safeguard their legitimate rights and interests. 1. Evidence Collection: Lawyers assist plaintiffs in gathering evidence relevant to the case, including mediation records, evidence of infringement, and proof of damages. Such evidence forms the foundation for protecting the plaintiff’s rights and serves as a critical basis for subsequent litigation or enforcement proceedings. 2. Issuance of Lawyer’s Letter: Lawyers may send a formal lawyer’s letter to the defendant, reiterating the defendant’s obligations and warning of the legal consequences of noncompliance. A lawyer’s letter not only serves as a deterrent but also functions as evidence demonstrating that necessary legal measures have been taken to protect the plaintiff’s rights. 3. Application for Enforcement: When the defendant refuses to comply with the mediation agreement, the lawyer may file an application for compulsory enforcement with the court on the plaintiff’s behalf. During this process, the lawyer actively assists the court in identifying the defendant’s assets—such as bank accounts, real estate, or vehicles—to enable effective enforcement measures. The above actions describe what judges and lawyers can do when mediation is conducted under court supervision. When mediation is facilitated by non-court-appointed mediators (e.g., industry associations or commercial mediation organizations), the mediation record remains highly significant. Although the court does not directly participate in the mediation process, the mediation record still constitutes a written manifestation of the parties’ mutual agreement. In such cases, the parties may jointly apply to the competent basic-level people’s court or people’s tribunal—located where the mediation organization is based—for judicial confirmation of the mediation agreement. According to relevant legal provisions, mediation agreements reached through people’s mediation committees or commercial mediation organizations may be subject to judicial confirmation upon joint application by both parties. The court will review the validity of the agreement; if it complies with statutory requirements, the court will issue a judicial confirmation ruling, which carries binding and enforceable effect. For example, in a patent infringement dispute, Plaintiff Tech Co., Ltd. and Defendant Electronics Co., Ltd. reached a mediation agreement through an industry mediation organization, whereby the defendant agreed to cease infringing activities and compensate the plaintiff for losses. Subsequently, both parties jointly applied to the court for judicial confirmation. After reviewing the case, the court determined that the agreement complied with legal requirements and issued a judicial confirmation ruling. When the defendant later reneged and refused to perform the agreement, the plaintiff successfully applied to the court for compulsory enforcement based on the judicial confirmation ruling, thereby effectively safeguarding its rights and interests. As illustrated by this case and relevant legal provisions, where mediation is not conducted under court supervision, the mediation record (including the mediation agreement) or the mediation agreement itself requires a joint application for judicial confirmation by both parties to the basic-level people’s court or people’s tribunal located where the mediation organization is based. What, then, should a party do if the defendant refuses to answer calls and thus cannot cooperate in the judicial confirmation process? If the mediation record lacks enforceability and unilateral judicial confirmation is not permitted, Article 102 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that where no agreement is reached through mediation—or where one party repudiates the mediation agreement before the mediation document is served—the people’s court shall promptly render a judgment. Therefore, if the defendant refuses to perform the mediation agreement recorded in the mediation record, the plaintiff may opt to resume the original court proceedings and request a judicial judgment on the merits of the case. Pursuant to Article 577 of the Civil Code, where a party fails to perform its contractual obligations or performs them in breach of agreement, it shall bear liability for continued performance, remedial measures, or compensation for losses.

Corteva, Inari settle US dispute over seed patents during trial

Sep 28, 2026

Agricultural biotech firms Corteva Agriscience and Inari Agriculture settled a patent dispute over corn and soybean seeds. Inari agreed to destroy Corteva materials and negotiate license agreements following the Delaware trial.

Reuters

2026-04-29

Midland Police Say Corteva Is Working to Reduce Overnight Noise at Dow Industrial Park

2026-04-29

Barclays Bank PLC Offers Trigger Notes Linked to Dow, EOG, Mosaic

2026-05-04

Meera Shete, Dow Inc. Named to Rising Stars 2026

2026-05-10

Fluor Q1 Earnings Call Highlights

2026-05-24

PPG Industries Valuation Analysis Following Q1 Earnings Beat and Coatings Expansion