(Originally published at WEIXIN https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r8a_Qa4ranD9IklmxCaGdA)
‍

‍
Following the previous article this Monday, "161 million! China's domestic substitution of high-end medical and surgical instruments has collectively encountered patent blocking" After the incident, domestic high-end medical and surgical equipment companies responded to Johnson & Johnson ( Johnson & Johnson ) New progress has been made in the global patent war.

Second round: Brazil's ban, lost and recovered

March 31, 2026, São Paulo State Court, Brazil President of the Private Court Roberto Nussinkis Mac Cracken In Johnson & Johnson v Scitech Patent infringement case of electric surgical stapler (Case No.: 1044824-18.2023.8.26.0100) Special and extraordinary appeals During the procedure, grant suspension of effect to the procedure, suspend the validity of the aforementioned judgment document, and restore the temporary injunction emergency relief previously granted.

In short, the case went through the experience of the court of first instance granting an interim injunction, the interim injunction being overturned on appeal, and then the reversal of the interim injunction being reinstated on special appeal.

The center of this patent dispute involved is actually a local battle in which Johnson & Johnson blocked the patents of China's high-end medical and surgical equipment manufacturers.

This time, the defendant Scitech Actually, it is China Jiangsu Fenghe Medical Equipment Co., Ltd (Wind and Medical) customers in Brazil, which are affected by the temporary ban, are actually targeted at Scitech has a partnership Fenghe Medical, and other Chinese manufacturers that have cooperative relationships with Scitech.

Corporate Patent Watch (PRIP) has reported several times in the past on the patent dispute between Johnson & Johnson and Fenghe Medical. In 2019, Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Aixikang filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Fenghe Medical in the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court, involving four patents with a total claim amount of nearly 100 million yuan The Committee recommends that the State party take all necessary measures to ensure that all children, regardless of their age, have access to adequate health care and adequate housing.

Involved in the invention patent entitled "Surgical stapling instrument containing a firing mechanism with linked rack transmission" ZL200410087485.9; Patent ZL2006101264 entitled "Nail cartridge for forming nails having different forming nail heights" 69.5; Patent ZL2006800353 entitled "Surgical anastomosis and cutting device and method of use thereof" 37. X; and Patent ZL2008101317 entitled “Surgical Suture Instrument” 06.6.

Not only that, in 2018, Johnson & Johnson also launched a lawsuit against Fenghe Medical in the Netherlands, and the two parties finally reached a settlement in June 2023.

At the same time, Fenghe Medical's Science and Technology Innovation Board IPO has begun.

But soon, Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates Nanjing Intermediate People's Court Three more infringement lawsuits were filed against Fenghe Medical, ultimately claiming 53.9 million yuan in compensation Intended to create obstacles for wind and medical IPOs.

Finally, in August 2024, Fenghe Medical Option withdrew its IPO.

Therefore, this is also what was mentioned in the previous article. Why Fenghe Medical launched several invalidation requests for one of the patents in China since 2020, until the patent was declared invalid on January 19 this year. The dispute between clamping and anti-clamping was actually motivated.

The battle in the Brazilian court is also a microcosm of the two companies' global offensive and defensive efforts.

July 17, 2025, The 2nd Commercial Court of the São Paulo State Court of Brazil made a first-instance judgment The court commissioned judicial appraisal and determination Scitech's Altus electric stapler falls completely into Johnson & Johnson PI 0807365-1 The scope of patent protection constitutes patent infringement and unfair competition. The court ordered Scitech to immediately stop producing, selling, importing, exporting and storing Altus products, recall the products on sale in the market, and compensate Scitech for emotional distress of R$50,000. The economic losses will be accounted for separately.

At the same time, an interim injunction was granted at first instance to prevent further sales of Altus in order to prevent the loss from widening.

On December 10, 2025, the Commercial Appeals Chamber of the São Paulo State Court in Brazil made a subversive ruling. The Court of Appeal held that the first instance limited the defendant's right to defense: it failed to allow Scitech to claim patent invalidity in the infringement lawsuit and rejected its application for supplementary appraisal, which violated the principle of argument and the right to a full defense. On this basis, the court annulled the first instance judgment and remanded the case for retrial. The temporary ban then expired and Altus could resume sales.

On March 27, 2026, RNA Law, the agency for Johnson & Johnson's Morning Brazil case, filed a special appeal against the appeal reversal ruling and urgently applied for suspension of effect, requesting the reinstatement of the temporary injunction. The appellant pointed out that Scitech had already filed an independent patent invalidation lawsuit in the Rio Federal Court. According to the law, it is not allowed to repeat the claim in the state court, otherwise it will trigger conflicting judgments and waste judicial resources; and the patent's valid technical appraisal has been formed in the federal lawsuit and can be used as evidence in this case, so there is no need for repeated appraisal. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal failed to clearly justify the injunction when it overturned the first-instance judgment, and impliedly lifting the injunction was seriously illegal.

March 31, 2026, São Paulo State Court, Brazil Private court The key ruling was made: the special appeal was granted suspensive effect and the first-instance interim injunction was immediately restored. The court determined that Johnson & Johnson's rights were sufficiently likely and the risk of damage was urgent. If the ban was not reinstated, continued infringement would lead to irreparable market losses. The ruling requires Scitech to immediately stop the production, sales, warehousing and promotion of Altus in Brazil until the final judgment of this case.

This case has multiple implications , one is The division of labor between the Brazilian Federal Court and the state courts is clarified: If a party has filed a federal invalidity lawsuit, the dispute may not be repeated in a state court infringement lawsuit, which protects the right to defense and prevents procedural abuse; The second is In the traditional impression, the Rio de Janeiro Court in Brazil is the court that grants more injunctions, while the São Paulo Court is the court favored by implementers. At present, the São Paulo Court is not ambiguous in granting injunctions; Three is The core argument of Johnson & Johnson's final comeback in this case is: The Federal Court has made an appraisal report to maintain the validity of the patent, which constitutes key evidence of the possibility of success; at the same time, it recognizes the urgency of this case, especially the irreparable damage that the lifting of the ban will cause Johnson & Johnson.

It is understood that in Brazilian courts, the success rate of such emergency applications is usually extremely low, only about 1%.

It can be said that this case has important practical guidance significance for Chinese companies that hope to deploy patents in Brazil: in patent protection, the survival of temporary injunctions and the path of procedural remedies directly affect the effectiveness of rights protection; at the same time, the rules for connecting invalidity and infringement procedures will greatly affect the direction of the case and business decisions.