利訴訟勝敗因素之探究－ 以勝訴率、專利無效比率、專利申請管理與專利訴訟決策為中心

Abstract

本文探究台灣、美國、德國及日本專利制度與其專利侵權訴訟勝訴率及專利無效比率。數據顯示，在專利侵權訴訟中，各國勝訴率在19%至25%之間，台灣、德國及日本的無效比率皆在六成以上。對於美國，即使有特殊證據開示程序(Discovery)，亦是目前各國專利權訴訟中最強而有力的蒐集證據程序，其2008年至2015年平均勝訴率僅21.05%。在德國，由於發明專利之侵權訴訟及無效訴訟分別繫屬於不同法院審理，專利權人在地方法院「擴大解讀其專利權利範圍」而致使系爭產品落入權利範圍，而在聯邦專利法院時，為使專利維持有效而「限縮解釋其專利權利範圍」。若比較台灣、美國、日本及德國之專利權人勝訴率時，德國宜根據與他國制度不同之處做適當修正。此外，德國關於判斷均等論侵權之法律標準，雖採「整體比對」原則，然其平均勝訴率亦小於25%。

在行政舉發程序中，台灣及日本的無效比率在48.04%至50.56%之間。在美國的多方複審程序中，權利請求項全部刪除及少一項修改比率更高達88%。對於已獲證之專利，其有效性有先天上的限制，專利權人僅依賴審查委員前案檢索及審查已顯然不足。訴訟前充分檢驗專利有效性及正確且合理的侵權判斷實為影響專利訴訟成敗重要的因素與課題。

此外，本文另透過實證研究，從專利訴訟的觀點，以質性研究方法，藉由焦點團體深度訪談，探究產研單位專利申請管理的運作模式及專利訴訟的決策模式，並以量化分析訴訟結果與專利撰寫事務所、專利訴訟處理事務所及智慧財產法院專利侵權案件中之當事人類型的關聯性，以統整探討影響專利訴訟成敗之可能因素。

This article discusses patent systems, patent infringement litigation win rates, and patent invalidation rates in Taiwan, the U.S., Germany, and Japan. The statistical results show that the win rates of patent infringement litigations in these countries are from 19% to 25% while the patent invalidation rates in Taiwan, Germany, and Japan are greater than 60%. The U.S. utilizes the discovery process, which is a unique and powerful evidence investigation process compared to other countries. However, the average win rate in the U.S. is merely 21.05% from 2008 to 2015. In Germany, infringement and validity issues of invention patents are dealt with by two different courts. A patent holder seeks to make a broad claim interpretation in infringement proceedings handled by the regional courts in order to cover the largest possible scope, whereas the same patent will have a narrow claim interpretation in validity proceedings handled by the German federal patent court, thereby avoiding revocations. When compared with Taiwan, the U.S. and Japan, the win rate in German needs to be appropriately calibrated due to its unique bifurcation system. In addition, although the regional courts adopted the "as a whole" approach when applying the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement cases, the average win rate is still less than 25%.

The invalidation rates through administrative procedures in Taiwan and Japan are from 48.04% to 50.56%. The invalidate rate through the inter partes reexamination procedures in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is even higher, up to 88%. Based on these statistics, the prior art search and examination conducted by the patent office examiners are obviously found to be not sufficient to verify the validity of granted patents. Thoroughly examining a patent’s validity and performing a correct and reasonable patent infringement analysis before filing a lawsuit are the important factors affecting the outcomes of patent infringement litigations.

In addition, this article further analyzes the operation mode of patent prosecution management and the decision-making mode of patent litigation in industries and technology research institutes by using the qualitative research method, from the perspective of patent litigations, with in-depth interviews of focus groups. The relationships between litigation outcomes and IP/law firms providing patent drafting services, law firms dealing with patent litigations, and parties involved in patent litigations in Taiwan Intellectual Property Court are also quantitatively analyzed for further discussions on root causes affecting litigation win/loss outcomes.