【摘要】：在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域，特別是專利權(quán)領(lǐng)域，臨時(shí)禁令制度是一種重要的臨時(shí)救濟(jì)措施。它及時(shí)保護(hù)權(quán)利人的合法利益，避免將來(lái)受到難以彌補(bǔ)的損害，其效果是其他措施不能比擬的。臨時(shí)禁令制度在西方資本主義先進(jìn)國(guó)家已經(jīng)經(jīng)歷了數(shù)百年的發(fā)展歷程，目前整個(gè)體系已比較完善。而我國(guó)的臨時(shí)禁令制度是在我國(guó)為了加入世界貿(mào)易組織（WTO），與國(guó)際接軌的背景下引入的，雖然在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的臨時(shí)性保護(hù)方面發(fā)揮出一定的效果，，但總體而言還遠(yuǎn)未達(dá)到完善的階段。 筆者在本文中主要通過理論與實(shí)踐結(jié)合和比較分析的方法，對(duì)臨時(shí)禁令制度在美國(guó)專利訴訟中的適用條件及實(shí)踐情況進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)、深入的分析論述，并在這基礎(chǔ)上與我國(guó)實(shí)際情況作對(duì)比研究，對(duì)我國(guó)臨時(shí)禁令制度的完善提出了一些建議。 第一部分是關(guān)于美國(guó)臨時(shí)禁令制度的概況介紹，從禁令的起源談起，具體介紹了臨時(shí)禁令的概念、特征以及美國(guó)臨時(shí)禁令的類型，著重闡述了臨時(shí)禁令制度在美國(guó)專利侵權(quán)訴訟中的發(fā)展情況，并對(duì)臨時(shí)禁令在專利訴訟中的重要性進(jìn)行總結(jié)，為下面的具體研究工作奠定基礎(chǔ)。 第二部分深入探討了臨時(shí)禁令制度在美國(guó)專利訴訟中的具體適用的程序要件，如聽證程序、擔(dān)保方式和上訴程序等。 第三部分結(jié)合司法實(shí)踐對(duì)勝訴的可能性、難以彌補(bǔ)的損害、雙方利益的權(quán)衡、公共利益的考慮等四個(gè)實(shí)質(zhì)條件要求進(jìn)行深入的研究分析，找出美國(guó)專利訴訟中臨時(shí)禁令制度中值得借鑒的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。 第四部分結(jié)合我國(guó)專利訴訟中臨時(shí)禁令的具體現(xiàn)狀問題，介紹了臨時(shí)禁令與傳統(tǒng)民事救濟(jì)方法即財(cái)產(chǎn)保全、先予執(zhí)行和證據(jù)保全的區(qū)別，同時(shí)與美國(guó)臨時(shí)禁令制度進(jìn)行對(duì)比分析，就我國(guó)專利訴訟臨時(shí)禁令制度的完善和實(shí)踐應(yīng)用提出自己的看法和一些解決方案，如設(shè)立合理的審查期限、設(shè)立專門審查部門、明確規(guī)定聽證程序、對(duì)擔(dān)保形式作靈活要求、完善復(fù)議程序以及完善“難以彌補(bǔ)的損害”和“勝訴可能性”等具體的實(shí)質(zhì)審查標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等。
[Abstract]:In the field of intellectual property, especially in the field of patent, temporary injunction is an important temporary remedy. It protects the legitimate interests of the obligee in time and avoids irreparable damage in the future, the effect of which is incomparable with other measures. The temporary prohibition system has experienced hundreds of years of development in the advanced western capitalist countries, and the whole system has been relatively perfect. China's temporary ban system was introduced in the context of China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) (WTO), in line with international standards, although it has played a certain role in the temporary protection of intellectual property rights. But overall it is far from perfect. In this paper, the author mainly through the combination of theory and practice and comparative analysis of the temporary injunction system in the United States patent proceedings in the application of conditions and practice of a detailed, in-depth analysis, On this basis, the author makes a comparative study with the actual situation of our country, and puts forward some suggestions on the perfection of the temporary prohibition system in our country. The first part is an overview of the temporary prohibition system in the United States, starting from the origin of the ban, introducing the concept, characteristics and types of the temporary prohibition in the United States. This paper emphatically expounds the development of the temporary injunction system in the patent infringement litigation in the United States, and summarizes the importance of the temporary injunction in the patent litigation, which lays a foundation for the following concrete research work. The second part discusses the procedural requirements of the application of the temporary injunction system in patent litigation in the United States, such as hearing procedure, guarantee method and appeal procedure. The third part of the judicial practice on the possibility of success, irreparable damage, the balance of interests of both sides, the consideration of public interest and other four substantive conditions for in-depth research and analysis, Find out the experience that should be used for reference in the temporary injunction system of patent litigation in the United States. The fourth part introduces the difference between the temporary injunction and the traditional civil relief method, namely property preservation, first execution and evidence preservation, combined with the current situation of temporary injunction in patent litigation in China. At the same time, by comparing with the temporary injunction system of the United States, the author puts forward his own views and some solutions on the perfection and practical application of the temporary injunction system of patent litigation in our country, such as setting up a reasonable period of examination, setting up a special examination department. It clearly stipulates the hearing procedure, makes flexible request to the form of guarantee, consummates the procedure of reconsideration, and consummates the concrete substantive examination standards such as "irreparable damage" and "possibility of success", etc.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華南理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2;D923.42;D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張江濤,薛波;美國(guó)中間禁令探討[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年03期

2 韓天嵐;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)訴訟中訴前禁令的適用[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2004年04期

3 張亮;王健;;我國(guó)訴前禁令制度探析[J];佛山科學(xué)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年01期

4 李瀾;美國(guó)禁令制度研究——兼評(píng)我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)訴訟中臨時(shí)禁令制度[J];科技與法律;2003年02期

5 和育東;;美國(guó)專利侵權(quán)的禁令救濟(jì)[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2009年05期

6 施高翔;齊樹潔;;我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)禁令制度的重構(gòu)[J];廈門大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年05期

7 劉洋;朱雪忠;;論臨時(shí)禁令制度的不足與完善[J];學(xué)習(xí)月刊;2006年12期

8 孫海龍;姚建軍;;中美兩國(guó)專利臨時(shí)禁令制度比較研究[J];中國(guó)專利與商標(biāo);2008年03期

9 李德山;臨時(shí)禁令在美國(guó)專利侵權(quán)訴訟中的適用[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);1999年05期

10 胡震遠(yuǎn);知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)案件中臨時(shí)禁令的適用標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2001年06期

本文編號(hào)：2404996