Review of a Possible Patent Infringement in Oil Production by Irkutsk Oil Company – Commentary by Sergey Zuykov

The Federal Service for Intellectual Property (Rospatent) has applied to the Main Directorate for Economic Security and Anti-Corruption of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia to review a possible patent infringement in oil production by Irkutsk Oil Company (INK). The review was initiated by the company Neftekhimsintez.

According to the applicant, INK allegedly unlawfully uses two inventions relating to the purification of oil from hydrogen sulfide and mercaptans (sulfur analogues of natural alcohols). The patent holders for these inventions are Vladimir Puzankov, CEO and co-owner of Neftekhimsintez, and Andrey Kulakov, the company’s beneficiary.

In its submission to Rospatent, Neftekhimsintez states that INK patented a similar invention, but the company’s patent was partially invalidated in September 2024.

The founders of Neftekhimsintez had previously initiated legal proceedings seeking to have INK’s technology recognized as dependent on their own. However, the Intellectual Property Rights Court ruled in favor of INK, stating that the claims were unfounded, and the cassation instance upheld this decision. In 2024, the beneficiaries of Neftekhimsintez filed another lawsuit against INK, but the claim was fully dismissed, and the ruling was confirmed by the cassation instance of the same court.

Within its authority, Rospatent may provide a legal assessment of a patent’s status, but investigating facts of industrial use and possible infringements does not fall within its powers; therefore, transferring the materials to the Ministry of Internal Affairs is logical from the standpoint of procedural division of competence, says Alexey Gavrishev, Managing Partner of AVG Legal.

As a rule, when filing a complaint, the applicant (the patent holder) attaches an expert opinion prepared by a specialist with relevant qualifications — a patent attorney, notes Sergey Zuykov, patent attorney and Managing Partner of Zuykov and Partners. At the same time, the police may independently commission an expert examination as part of reviewing the alleged infringement, either before initiating a criminal case or within the framework of one, he clarifies.

In accordance with Article 147 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Violation of Inventive and Patent Rights”), the maximum penalty is a fine of up to 300,000 rubles, corrective labor for up to five years, or imprisonment for the same term, Zuykov recalls.

Zuykov also points out that Neftekhimsintez, in its statement, refers to INK’s purchase of certain individual components that form part of the patented invention as evidence of patent infringement. However, purchasing components separately cannot in itself constitute patent infringement, the lawyer says. Moreover, the statement contains no information confirming the use of all essential features of the invention’s claims.

Thus, it will not be easy for the applicant to prove the oil company’s guilt; it cannot be ruled out that the parties will settle the dispute out of court.

Source: Vedomosti