1. Identification of means-plus-function limitation

In the case of Xiamen Lukasi Automobile Parts Co., Ltd., Xiamen Fuke Automobile Parts Co., Ltd. (Defendants-Appellants) v. VALEO SYSTEMES D'ESSUYAGE (Plaintiff-Appellee) and Chen Shaoqiang (Defendant in the first instance), a dispute over infringement of invention patent [case No.: 2019 SPCICS 2], the SPC held that where a limitation defines or implies a particular structure, component, process, condition, or mutual relationship there-between in the technical solution as desired by the invention, even if such limitation also defines the function or effect to be performed or realized, in principle, such limitation shall not be deemed as means-plus-function limitation under Article 8 of the Interpretation (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases.

2. Substantial limitation role of effect and function as described in subject matter title of patent in claim construction

In the case of Sun Xixian (Appellant) v. Hunan Jingyi Ecological Technology Co., Ltd. (Appellee), a dispute over infringement of invention patent [case No.: 2019 SPCICS 657], the SPC held that if the effect and function as described in the subject matter title of the patent in certain claim are not the effect and function to be realized and performed by the structure, component, process, condition, or the mutual relationship there-between as stated in the characterizing portion of such claim, but demonstrate the difference between the technical solution as presented in the patent and prior art, then such effect and function as described in the subject matter title shall have substantial limitation role in determining the protection scope of the claim in question.

3. Ascertaining of infringement on method or process patent in case of accused technical solution as executed by multiple parties

In the case of Shenzhen Jixiang Tenda Technology Co., Ltd. (Appellant) v. Shenzhen Dunjun Technology Co., Ltd. (Appellee) and Jinan Lixia Haowei Electronic Product Sales Department, Jinan Lixia Haowei Electronic Product Sales Department (Defendants in the first instance), a dispute over infringement of invention patent [2019 SPCICS 147], the SPC held that if the allegedly infringing party programs the substantial content of a patented method into the accused device for business purpose, which plays an irreplaceable and substantial role in full coverage of all the limitations in the claim at issue, and consequently the end users can easily execute such method when using the accused devices, then the aforesaid act of programming as executed by the allegedly infringing party shall constitute patent infringement.