China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPC Issues China’s First Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction (AASI) in IP Case

Thu, 24 Apr 2025
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 12 Dec. 2024, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued China’s first anti-anti-suit injunction (AASI) in the global patent dispute between Huawei and Netgear Inc. (Case No: 2024 Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong 914 (2024最高法知民终914) and 2024 Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Zhong 915 (2024最高法知民终915号)). The SPC prohibited Netgear from using foreign judicial proceedings to obstruct Huawei’s patent litigation and judgment enforcement in China, with a penalty of CNY 1 million (or USD 139,675) per day for violations. This marks China’s first proactive judicial intervention in global standard essential patent (SEP) governance.

Since 2020, Huawei has been negotiating with Netgear over Wi-Fi 6 patent licensing on a FRAND basis, but the talks failed. In 2022, Huawei initiated infringement lawsuits in China, Germany, and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) of Europe. In January 2024, Netgear countersued Huawei in the United States under the Sherman Act and, on December 4, applied for an anti-suit injunction (ASI) to block Huawei from proceeding with the lawsuits in China and Europe.

On 9 Dec. 2024, Huawei filed AASI applications with the Regional Court of Munich in Germany and the UPC. Both courts ruled the following day, ordering Netgear to withdraw its ASI application in the U.S. and prohibiting any further applications for anti-anti-anti-suit injunctions (AAASI).

On 22 Dec. 2024, the SPC issued its AASI within 48 hours of receiving Huawei’s application, ordering Netgear to refrain from using foreign judicial proceedings to interfere with Huawei’s litigation and judgment enforcement in China. In its ruling, the SPC found that Netgear had engaged in “delays and unreasonable counteroffers” during the negotiations. It also found that the U.S. ASI would deprive Huawei of legal remedies in China, causing irreparable harm.

Reportedly, shortly after the SPC’s issuance of its AASI, the parties reached a comprehensive settlement covering 16 lawsuits in six courts around the world.

This case illustrates a trend of judicial coordination in countering “long-arm jurisdiction”, as the Chinese court, German court, and the UPC simultaneously issued AASIs. The SPC’s move not only safeguards China’s judicial sovereignty but also sets a precedent for “judicial countermeasures” for global SEP disputes.

 

 

Photo by Xuyu Chi on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.