Pegavision filed patent infringement lawsuit against Yung Sheng Optical and Hydron

　On May 3, 2024, Pegavision made a major announcement that it filed an action with the Intellectual Property & Commercial Court (hereinafter “IP&C Court”) to assert patent infringement against Taiwan-based Yung Sheng Optical and (hereinafter “Yung Sheng”) China-based Hydron Contact Lenses (hereinafter “Hydron”), seeking court orders demanding removal and prevention of all infringing activities and damages payment by the two defendants, in order to eradicate malpractice of infringement in the same trade, avoid further damage to Pegavision’s patent rights, and safeguard its competitive advantages developed by its long-term R&D investment.  

　Pegavision found Yung Sheng suspected of infringing upon its invention patents by the eye contact lenses manufactured by Yung Sheng and sold under the brand name, Hydron.  Being aware of the occurrence of suspected infringement, Pegavision filed a patent infringement action with the IP&C Court to maintain that Yung Sheng and Hydron jointly infringed upon Pegavision’s invention patents No. I634205 titled “Solution for treating contact lens” and No. I671086 titled “Ophthalmic product and ophthalmic composition thereof” by several products made and sold by Yung Sheng and Hydron falling within the scope of the claims of the said two invention patents.  

　Yung Sheng, Hydron, and Jiangsu Horien Contact Lens Co., Ltd. are the three major subsidiaries of Ginko International Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ginko International”), which is mainly engaged in the business of making and selling eye contact lenses and care solutions.  In response to the patent infringement action initiated by Pegavision, Ginko International expressed that all of its products must undergo patent infringement analysis and evaluation to assure no occurrence and no likelihood of infringement before product launch.  Likewise, Ginko International had conducted the aforesaid procedure of analysis and evaluation on the products involved in the lawsuit, and therefore, there should be no likelihood of infringement as alleged by Pegavision.  (Released 2024.05.04)  
/CCS