On the afternoon of April 21, a ceremony, presided over by Ms. Li Shulan, Vice President of Shang IPR Court, was held in the court to engage specially-invited experts for scientific and technical consultations. Mr. Wu Xielin, President of Shanghai IPR Court, conferred letters of appointment upon the first batch of 18 academic (or technical) leaders coming from such institutions of higher learning as Fudan University, Tongji University, Jiao Tong University, Shanghai University, ShanghaiTech University and East China University of Science and Technology as well as from research institutions like Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai Research Institute of Chemical Industryin theprofessional fields of machinery, chemical industry, material science, software, pharmacology, chemistry and communications, to name just a few. The IPR judges may consult these technical experts in need of identifying the technical problems when it is unnecessary to start technical identification procedures or to turn to specific technical equipment for relevant suggestions. Mr. Wu Xielin, after expressinghis gratitude to the 18 experts for the acceptance of the court’s appointment to be the first for scientific and technical consultations, pointed out that these experts, serving as a think-tank behind IPR judges during the settlement of litigations, represented the court’s major attempt to implement the national strategies of innovation-driven development and intellectual property rights as well as to fuel the construction of a technology and innovation center with global influences in Shanghai. On the other hand, such attempt would also provide potent support for improvement of the IPR trial mechanism and judiciary dominant role in protecting the IP rights. The positive significance and functions of the attempt reflect in four aspects. Firstly the experts’ strength in technical terms might make up the judges’weakness in technical field, which could help them identify, with greater accuracy, the technical facts in dispute.Secondly the role of the experts as a think-tank might be brought to full play to promote the improvement of the investigation methods of judges in dealing with technical IPR cases and to enhance the judges’ capability of examining and identifying technical facts. Thirdly the participation of technical experts would reassert the principle of judicial democracy and boost the social recognition of IPR verdicts. Fourthly its complementation with technical authentication and the technical investigation policy would helpimprove the technical authentication and identification system. On the appointment meeting, the technical experts took the floor one after another to express their appreciation and recognition of the establishment of a technical expert think-tank by Shanghai IPR Court. Convinced that it was an effective way for the court to step up scientific innovation, the experts also saidthat they were ready to play their roles and contribute duly to the technical consultation functions of their team for better protection of the IPR.