Dahon: 'Neobike’s Reaction on Court Verdict Misleading'

TAIPEI, Taiwan (June 13) - This trade journal reported in its May edition a reaction from Neobike on the article ‘Dahon Jails Neobike Executives’ that was in Bike Europe’s April issue. According to Neobike it is not true that it has infringed on the patent rights of Dahon California Inc. and Dahon California Inc. did not file any criminal lawsuit for infringement of patent with the legal court in Taiwan. Moreover, according to Neobike: 'Our five employees were found unguilty with regards to the above accusation of betraying business secrets.' In a reaction on the article in Bike Europe’s May edition which was also published on our website, Joshua Hon, Director of Sales and Marketing at Dahon, states, 'Neobike's reply is full of legal doubletalk that is intended to mislead. They say no case was filed by Dahon California. This is correct, the case was filed by Dahon, Inc. a wholly owned subsidiary of Dahon California. We fail to see the relevance or the difference. As for the exact finding of guilt, it is for filing a false patent application, in violation of non-compete contracts, and thereby damaging the credibility of the Taiwan patent office and the rights and benefits of Dahon, Inc. However the "fact" remains that the founders of Neobike were found guilty and they were sentenced to five months in prison. In this case, Neobike is like the criminal who claims he is innocent of burglary when he has been convicted of robbery.' As evidence to prove that Dahon Inc. filed a case against several founders of Neobike and that the court reached a final verdict that cannot be appealed and that the defendants were found guilty and convicted to jail sentences, Dahon supplied Bike Europe with a translation of the 44 page court judgement. Reading the translated court documents, Dahon’s claims are confirmed. The court judgement states: 'The five defendants, in order to avoid detection by Dahon of any violation of the 'non-compete' agreement, which prohibits engagement in similar business activities within two years of departure, and the fact they are now a part of a competing company, they proceeded to conspire to commit a crime. Knowing full well that Hsu Su-yuan (Ms.) was merely an accountant with Neobike, without any technical education or design experience or ability, and was not in fact the real inventor of the (substance in the) patent (application), they deceitfully and wrongfully used her name, on 3/3/1993, as both the inventor and the applicant on the sworn official application form, and delivered it to the Patent Office, so as to cause the officials to commit mistakes in recording facts on official documents, and to further publish it in legal journal as Patent (application) #82202540. These actions have damaged the credibility of the Patent Office, as well as the rights and benefits of Dahon, Inc.' (JO)