Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: China Topics: Issues discussed in the text First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-10 [China] Requirements when further limiting an independent claim while amending an original dependent claim into an independent claim <Supreme People’s Court, Zhi Xing Zhong No. 556 (December 12, 2023)> The patentee made corrections as shown in the table. Because the substantive content and

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Other foreign jurisdictions Topics: Issues discussed in the text First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-10 [India] Syngenta v. Controller (Patent Office), 471/202 (Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, October 13, 2023) *A Delhi High Court judgment that relaxed the requirements for divisional applications! Before this judgment, the practice was that an invention disclose

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: Claim interpretation, Numerical limitations and parameters First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 5 (Wa) No. 70178 — Zinc acetate hydrate tablets (Judge Nakajima) *The claim was held not to be satisfied unless the temperature remained within the numerical range until the end of the drying process. (Excerpt from the judgment, trans

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Unfair competition law Topics: Issues discussed in the text First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-10 [Unfair competition] Osaka High Court, Reiwa 6 (Ne) No. 1775 — “Wam” *Only the claim for return of the manuals was upheld. → Completion of the litigation also conclusively determines the obligation to return the manuals. Keeping them for litigation purposes does not excuse

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: Support requirement First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 5 (Wa) No. 70114 — Motorcycle brake control device (Judge Shibata) *An error in the detailed description of the invention. The argument that it was an obvious clerical error was rejected. → Support requirement not satisfied. (Excerpt from the judgment, translated) A person

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: Clarity、Enablement、Examination and appeal practice First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 IP High Court, Heisei 17 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10645 — Method for inspecting sealed packages (Judge Tsukahara) *The mechanism described in the claims and specification contradicts the laws of physics. → Clarity and enablement requirements not satisfied. (Excerpt from the judgmen

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Trademarks Topics: Issues discussed in the text First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-10 [Trademarks] IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10071 — “Taishoken” (Judge Miyasaka) *An implied agreement granting a non-exclusive trademark license requires objectively verifiable, clear and affirmative intent to confer a right, going beyond mere acquiescence. → Cancellation for no

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: Support requirement First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 IP High Court, Reiwa 3 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10094 — PCSK9 (second litigation) (Judge Kanno) *It was successfully proved that the technical significance asserted by the patentee did not hold! → Support requirement not satisfied. (Excerpt from the judgment, translated) …The technical significance of the invent

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: Patent eligibility First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 Tokyo High Court, Heisei 15 (Gyo-Ke) No. 166 — …Topical agent for treating atopic dermatitis (Judge Tsukahara) *Falsity of the examples described in the specification was successfully established! → Not an “invention” eligible for a patent. (Excerpt from the judgment, translated) Although the specific

日本語版 Article information Article type: Administrative decision note Category: Trademarks Topics: Similarity of trademarks、Examination and appeal practice First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 [Trademarks / JPO decision] Opposition No. 2023-900278 Although “UNIQLO” is well known, it is dissimilar to “UNIPRO,” and there is no likelihood of confusion in the broader sense (suggesting some form of affiliation). “There is no risk of con