How the hottest Chinese enterprises face clause 33

2022-09-23
  • Detail

How do Chinese enterprises face the "337" clause of the United States? James adus, a member of the board of directors of the U.S. International Trade Commission, pointed out that at present, U.S. enterprises use China and other factors to ensure the normal operation of instruments. Foreign enterprises are unable to respond quickly in a very short time, and most of them do not take the initiative to respond to lawsuits. The simplest legal means of frequent use of prosecution procedures is the "kill with one arrow" - 337 investigation

"at present, American enterprises are very fond of speculation 'section 337 of the tariff law' investigation. Taking advantage of factors such as China and other foreign enterprises' inability to respond quickly in a very short period of time and most of them do not take the initiative to respond to the lawsuit, the simplest legal means to frequently use the prosecution procedures is' kill many birds with one arrow '---33 therefore, the implementation of degradable plastics has become a top priority. 7 investigation, which is one of the reasons why Chinese enterprises 337 investigation is particularly frequent." The Symposium on "US anti-dumping and analysis of clause 337" sponsored by 9 units, including Guangdong Intellectual Property Protection Association, Guangdong Provincial Enterprise Federation, Guangzhou Association of private science and technology enterprises, and Guangdong Hong'an law firm, was held at the Guangzhou doctor's club a few days ago. James adus, the former chairman of the US International Trade Commission and now a member of the board of directors of the US International Trade Commission, pointed out when reporting to the participants

337 survey of American enterprise speculation

James pointed out in his report that from the geographical distribution of the 337 survey clause of the U.S. tariff act in, the respondents were all enterprises in Asia and the Americas, Europe and the Middle East, of which Asia accounted for as much as 72%, including enterprises in Chinese Mainland, Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and South Korea; Companies in the Americas, Europe and the Middle East account for only 28%

he said that in the 337 survey, one of the key is the ownership and use right of intellectual property rights. 45% of the products surveyed are high-tech products, and 88% of foreign products infringe the patents of American enterprises. Chinese enterprises' top priority is to solve the regional problems of intellectual property rights such as patents. If they can successfully obtain the exclusive right of intellectual property rights (patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc.) in the United States, they can obtain the right to speak

James emphasized that in the 337 investigation he came into contact with or learned about, many U.S. companies had speculative behavior, using foreign enterprises such as China to have little knowledge of U.S. legal procedures, unable to respond quickly in a very short time, most of them did not take the initiative to respond to the lawsuit, or did not choose to respond to the lawsuit (automatic waiver) because they were afraid of procedures, heavy procedures, and expensive litigation costs (generally more than US $1-3 million), The simplest way to frequently use the prosecution procedure is the legal means of "killing many birds with one arrow" -- 337 tariff law investigation. Of course, all this does not mean that the patents and other intellectual property rights from the U.S. prosecution must be valid and legal. For example, in the China Battery 337 investigation in 2003 and 2004, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) concluded that the patents owned by the plaintiff U.S. Jinliang holding company (hereinafter referred to as American Jinliang) are invalid patents, and the seven Chinese battery enterprises, including Fujian Nanping Nanfu Battery Co., Ltd., do not constitute patent infringement. This problem requires Chinese enterprises to be vigilant and calm

according to ITC statistics, during the year, in 337 investigated cases, 50% were privately settled by both parties, 20% were non-compliance by foreign enterprises, 14% were self withdrawal of complaints by American enterprises, and only 16% were violations of intellectual property of American enterprises, which also need the government's policy support. In addition, about half of the American companies that initiated the 337 investigation lawsuit are Americans, and the rest are from Asia, Europe and other regions. "What should Chinese enterprises do if they are attacked by article 337?" James said that we should first estimate the amount of compensation and our own strength, and work with legal counsel to decide and formulate a long-term product price plan in advance

James said that in the face of the 337 investigation, Chinese enterprises have "solution" (seeking a private solution may be expensive), "Absence", "confrontation" and "counterattack". As long as they dare to respond to the lawsuit, Chinese enterprises will have a great chance of winning the 337 investigation in the United States, as high as 50%

James reminded that it is best for Chinese enterprises to apply for their own patents in the United States, and the more, the better for themselves; At ordinary times, we can also strengthen the communication and understanding with the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. patent and Trademark Office (), and strive to be "American connect", so that the possibility and cost of suffering and loss may be reduced

337 investigation can be broken or attacked

as one of the members of the U.S. report team of "U.S. anti-dumping and 337 clause analysis", lawyer David C. Bao Heng told Hosokawa Alpine Ag in Augsburg, Germany, that it would show an 11 layer film blowing production line. In an interview, the author pointed out that 337 investigation is a double-edged sword, which can be broken or attacked

the author asked lawyer David C. Bao Heng, an expert in international trade affairs, whether Chinese enterprises can easily cope with the frequent international trade barriers and the international intellectual property litigation investigated by the United States 337 in the face of economic globalization. David pointed out that Chinese enterprises should first understand the fundamental nature of the 337 investigation of the U.S. International Trade Commission. All American enterprises and patents registered in the United States in accordance with legal procedures (whether native or foreign nationals) will have the priority to resolve disputes. For example, Chinese enterprises can prove that they have their own independent operating companies and valid U.S. patents in the United States, ITC will consider whether the objects and terms of litigation from the prosecution are appropriate, and will generally recommend that the prosecution exclude the U.S. enterprises with patents from the prosecution list or use other legal means in the United States to solve the contradiction between the two parties. This method is also applicable to anti-dumping

he believes that in order to enter the international market, Chinese enterprises should make plans and preparations for international trade disputes and major lawsuits, try every means to avoid and actively resolve them, such as injecting capital to establish American companies (joint ventures, sole proprietorships), to be fully responsible for managing the entire American market, while simultaneously applying and protecting patents between China and the United States, learn to create a favorable situation foundation by themselves, and turn passivity into initiative. When Chinese companies have American institutions and patents, they are not afraid that some American companies will prevent them from entering the American market. At the same time, legal means such as 337 investigation can also be used to sue foreign companies that infringe or damage their intellectual property rights, so as to better consolidate market share. (end)

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI