亚马逊卖家被投诉发明专利侵权后，申诉用的“非侵权意见书”样式

被投诉发明专利侵权，导致链接下架后，要恢复链接的主要办法有：

1，提供一份法院命令，即需要发起#宣告式判决，拿到反向TRO后才有机会恢复链接；

2，出具一份由专利律师出具的#非侵权意见书

3，联系专利权人协商恢复链接

最常采用的是办法2，其次是办法1，最后才是办法3。

经常有卖家加到我们联系之后，想要我们提供案例，以证明我们有能力有经验为其当下困境。考虑到客户隐私问题，绝大部分案例都是不可以直接分享的，今天拿其中一份非侵权意见书进行展示，分享给有需要的卖家进行参考。考虑到客户因为问题，部分关键信息还是需要隐藏的。

以下是其中一份非侵权意见书内容：（P.S.内容本身是文档，转换成公众号文章难免格式有冲突，可能造成版式有缺陷）

To: Amazon

From: 专利律师名称

Subject: U.S. Patent （专利号）to Wendling

ASIN: 

Infringement type: Patent

IP asserted: 专利号

Complaint ID: 

Rightsownername:iPrimio

Rights owner email: 

LETTER OF NON-INFRINGEMENT

This letter addresses the complaint made to Amazon regarding my client's product and U.S. Patent （专利号）.

To understand what is required to infringe upon a patent, it is essential to grasp the basic concepts and legal requirements involved. Here is a primer explaining the key elements necessary for patent infringement:

1. Valid and Enforceable Patent: Patent infringement can only occur if the asserted patent is valid and enforceable. A patent is a legal monopoly granted by a government to an inventor, providing exclusive rights to manufacture, use, or sell an invention for a limited period of time.

2. Claims Interpretation: The claims of a patent define the scope of protection  granted. These claims outline the specific features, elements, or steps that make an invention novel and non-obvious. Courts interpret patent claims to determine their exact meaning and boundaries.

3. Literal Infringement: Literal infringement occurs when a product or process falls within the exact scope of the patent claims. Each element or limitation described in the claims must be present in the alleged infringing product or process.

4. Doctrine of Equivalents: Under the doctrine of equivalents, even if an alleged infringing product or process does not literally meet every element of a patent  claim, it can still be found to infringe if it performs substantially the same function substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result as the patented invention.

In order for a product to be deemed infringing, it must encompass each and every component stipulated in the independent claims. In the matter at hand, the patent integrates three independent claims. A thorough analysis of these independent claims should be our primary focus, given that the absence of infringement on these claims automatically negates any possible infringement on their dependent counterparts. Within the Wendling patent, the three claims manifest as follows:

1. A pet mat comprising:

a first planar layer constructed of a synthetic material, A second planar layer constructed of a synthetic material and overlying said first layer, said second planar layer pivotally connected to said first planar layer, and a plurality of spaced openings extending entirely through said second layer.

said openings increasing in cross-sectional area from a side of said second layer in abutment with said first layer and away from said first layer.

5. A pet mat comprising:

a first planar layer constructed of a synthetic material, the first planar layer includes an upper surface; and a second planar layer constructed of a synthetic material, the second planar layer includes an upper planar surface and an opposite lower surface, the second planar layer overlying the first planar layer such that the lower surface of the second

A planar layer abuts the upper surface of the first planar layer, the second planar

The layer includes a plurality of openings that extend from the upper planar surface of the second planar layer to the lower surface of the second planar layer, the second planar layer pivotally connected to the first planar layer between a use position   and a cleaning position; in the use position, the lower surface of the second planar layer abuts the upper surface of the first planar layer, and in the cleaning position, the lower surface of the second planar layer is pivoted away from the upper

surface of the first planar layer.

wherein the size of each opening of the plurality of openings at the upper planar surface of the second planar layer is larger than the size of the opening at the lower surface of the second planar layer.

14. A pet mat comprising:

a first planar layer constructed of a synthetic material;

a second planar layer constructed of a synthetic material and overlying said first layer.

a hinge that pivotally connects said first layer to said second layer; and

a plurality of spaced openings extending entirely through said second layer, said openings increasing in cross-sectional area from a side of said second layer in abutment with said first layer and away from said first layer.

A more detailed dissection of the claims is found below. The highlights above are elements in each claim that are not found in my client's product:

In each of the independent claims, the top layer is required to pivot away from the bottom layer (highlights above):

Claim chart

（P.S.内容本身是文档，转换成公众号文章难免格式有冲突，可能造成版式有缺陷），大概都是这个版式。

经验分享：

1. 一旦被投诉发明专利侵权，首先需马上评估是否真侵权了。

2. 如明显不侵权，则让美国专利律师协助出非侵权意见书去申诉。这里注意，就算不侵权，不侵权意见书写得不好也有可能申诉不成功的。

3. 如确实明显侵权，链接又很重要，并且对方专利有瑕疵，那么直接向法院发起宣告式判决，则链接有机会恢复。