Whether a patent order is legitimate or appropriate should be first internally reviewed by the Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economics and monitored by the Ministry of Economics through its administrative power. If the administrative self-control is not satisfying, then the administrative court can perform a post-action judicial review on the administrative action of making a patent order so as to ensure the goal of a rule-of-law nation whose action should follow the law. Consider that Defendant of this rehearing case asserts that Plaintiff of this rehearing case infringed the patent-in-suit and asks for damages for the infringement. So, whether Defendant of this rehearing case may demand damages should depend on the lawful validity of the patent-in-suit as a prerequisite. The finalized civil decision of this case was made on a basis of the administrative order of granting the patent-in-suit. Additionally, the administrative order of granting the patent-in-suit issued by the Intellectual Property Office of the Ministry of Economics has not been invalidated finally, and the patent-in-suit is still lawfully valid. Then, the finalized decision of this case was made on a basis of the administrative order of granting the patent-in-suit and is legally reliable. As a result, this case is not changed so as to make the ground of the original finalized decision disturbed, as Plaintiff of this rehearing case asserts because of the following finalized administrative order. No rehearing cause vested in Article 496, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure is met, so there is obviously no rehearing cause

rehearing causes, administrative self-examination, damages, administrative order, patent