To implement Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on Further Promoting the Separation of Simple Cases from Complex Cases to Optimize the Allocation of Judicial Resources and relevant requirements of Shanghai High People’s Court, better meet the requirements of people for fairness and efficiency of trial, and provide judicial remedies of intellectual property to people in a more convenient and timely way, Shanghai Intellectual Property Court has been vigorously promoting the separation of simple cases from complex ones to further optimize the allocation of judicial resources and improve the quality and efficiency of the trial of cases. In the first half of 2018, the court accepted 1013 cases and concluded 894 cases, and the numbers increased respectively by 26.15% and 14.76% compared with the previous year. With a huge surge in the number of accepted cases, the court still managed to maintain a virtuous circle of accepting and concluding cases. It has adopted a series of measures. I. to carry out concentrated trial of a batch of cases. A judge assistant has been appointed to be in charge of all the cases concerning the same parties which will be collected, arranged, tried and ruled together and will be tried by the same collegiate bench during the same period. For the 30 cases concerning infringement upon screening right between the Appellant Shanghai Night Club and the Appellee China Audio-Video Copyright Association, the court implemented the system of concentrated trial and concluded the 30 cases within 40 days. II. To deepen the reform of diversified dispute resolution mechanism. Endeavors have been made to bring into full play the role of the 13 contracted social organizations and trade associations in mediation, to arrange mediators to provide services at the court on a regular basis, and to continuously help bring about mediation before and during the trial. In the first half of 2018, the court entrusted 57 pre-litigation mediation cases to relevant organizations, with 14 successfully completed and the success rate reaching 24.56%; the court entrusted 126 mediation cases during litigation to relevant organizations, with 38 successfully completed and the success rate hitting 30.16%. III. To actively explore new ways of hearing. Pretrial conference has been utilized to facilitate the confirmation of the claims of the parties and the summary of the undisputed facts and dispute focus, achieving an effective link-up between pretrial conference and court trial. For undisputed facts confirmed in the pretrial conference, no evidence or cross-examination is required during the trial; the trial will mainly concentrate on the dispute focus. For cases with clear facts and dispute focus confirmed in the pretrial conference, innovations have been made on the ways of hearing, for example, to introduce remote video conference into hearing. In the first half year, over 10 cases were heard through remote video conference, providing convenience for the parties concerned and improving the efficiency of trial. IV. To prepare judgment documents based on the complexity of cases. For novel and complex cases, the judgment document would include explanation of cases; especially for cases involving disputes over the interpretation of laws and regulations, the judgment document would include explanation of the rule of application of relevant laws. The court endeavors to sum up judgment rules that can be universally applicable by trial of cases. For the case concerning the infringement upon trademark between the Appellant Nanjing Yihua Medicine Co., Ltd. and the Appellee Wuxi Jimin Kexin Shanhe Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, as it involved the judgment of trademark infringement and belonged to both administrative and civil cases, the collegiate bench amplified the reasoning of the judgment document and issued a 38-page judgment document with over 20,000 words. For cases with clear facts and legal relations, the judgment document will be simplified. The court has also been actively groping for other simple formats of judgment documents such as table format. In the contract dispute concerning the intellectual property between the Plaintiff Hangzhou Lianxiang Information Technology Co., Ltd. and the Defendant Shanghai Dishi Computer Technology Co., Ltd., as the facts were clear, the collegiate bench prepared the judgment document in a form of a table for the first time; the four-page judgment only included about one thousand words.