Mabgeek Biotech’s Patent Covering the Sequence and Uses of Comekibart (MG-K10) Upheld as Valid
2026-04-24 0
Following a request for declaration of invalidation filed by Sunshine Guojian Pharmaceutical (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. against the invention patent (ZL202010309238.8) independently developed and owned by Mabgeek Biotech, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) duly formed a collegiate panel and conducted a comprehensive and rigorous examination. CNIPA recently issued its decision on the invalidation request: the patent right is maintained valid.
Source: China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)
Source: China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)
1. Principle of Good Faith
Where there is a potential conflict or inconsistency between experimental data in the patent at issue and experimental data in other similar patent applications, a comprehensive analysis should be conducted by considering the various factors that may affect the experimental data and the similarities and differences in such factors between the patent at issue and the evidentiary documents. If the existing evidence is insufficient to establish that the experimental data in the patent were fabricated, falsified, or altered, it cannot be concluded that the patent violates Article 11 of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law.
2. Support by the Specification
If the technical solution defined by a claim can be obtained or generalized by a person skilled in the art from the contents sufficiently disclosed in the specification, the technical solution should be regarded as being supported by the specification.
3. Clarity of the Scope of Protection
If a person skilled in the art, upon reading the claims and the specification of the patent, can understand the actual meaning of an expression in the claims, including determining whether there is an obvious drafting error and identifying the definite and correct content, such expression should not be considered to render the scope of protection of the claims unclear.
4. Inventive Step
Where the CDR sequences, which constitute the key structures determining the function and use of the monoclonal antibody protected by a claim, are clearly different from the CDR sequences of monoclonal antibodies disclosed in the prior art, and the prior art provides no clear teaching for obtaining CDRs having such novel structures, and a person skilled in the art can confirm, based on the disclosure of the specification and the prior art, that the claimed monoclonal antibody provides beneficial technical effects in the ordinary sense, the inventive step of the monoclonal antibody should be recognized.