IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10054
[Use of DPPIV inhibitors] (Presiding Judge Hasegawa) Exhibit Ko 1 stated that "in the case of the oral route, the range is preferably 1–100 mg, administered 1–4 times per day." Further, in light of common general knowledge:
![[Copyright] IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Ne) 10063](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_46a84176861d41598705fea8c193c018~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_1329,h_1000,fp_0.50_0.50,q_35,blur_30,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_46a84176861d41598705fea8c193c018~mv2.png)
![[Copyright] IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Ne) 10063](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_46a84176861d41598705fea8c193c018~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_1276,h_960,fp_0.50_0.50,q_95,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_46a84176861d41598705fea8c193c018~mv2.png)
[Copyright] IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Ne) 10063
"Mark Gonzales / Angel" (Presiding Judge Moritomi) (= First instance: Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2023 (Wa) 70127, Presiding Judge Shibuya) <Applicable law>
[Right to reputation] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2025 (Wa) 70451
(Presiding Judge Nakajima) *A right to demand deletion against note inc. was recognized. No. 1: A statement suggesting that the plaintiff paid money to appear on ABEMA Prime through a slot obtained by connections
IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10076
[Vehicle guidance system] (Presiding Judge Masuda) *Divisional requirements satisfied (no addition of new matter)
[Unfair Competition Prevention Act / Imitation of configuration]
Case No. 2025 (Ne) 10055 (Presiding Judge Hasegawa) Substantial identity of configuration denied The survey at issue did not use close-up photographs of the coats, but had respondents compare overall images of unknown resolution on mobile phones or computer screens. The impression obtained differs from that obtained by actually holding and observing the products.
[Trademark] IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10066
"AFURI / 阿夫利" (Presiding Judge Hasegawa) The plaintiff (AFURI) had brought a trademark infringement action concerning the sake "雨降 (Afuri)" sold by the defendant (Yoshikawa Jozo). The defendant (Yoshikawa Jozo) requested a trial for invalidation of the plaintiff's "AFURI / 阿夫利" trademark in the alcoholic beverages field, asserting similarity to the cited trademark "阿夫利大山."
IP High Court, Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10051
[Pharmaceutical product] (Koa v. Toa) (Presiding Judge Masuda) *Inventive step denied
[Unfair Competition Prevention Act / Trade secrets]
Osaka District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 5424 (Presiding Judge Matsuami) "Details of users' insurance information, etc. (part of the master maintenance information), and Home-Visit Nursing Record I" constitute trade secrets.
Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2023 (Wa) 70083
[Body of a slider for a slide fastener] (Presiding Judge Shibuya) [Issue 1] Where components (sliders) manufactured and sold abroad are incorporated into finished products (bags, etc.) and distributed within Japan, does the component manufacturer bear liability for a joint tort or otherwise for infringement of a Japanese design right?
[IP Practice Online] Reviewing U.S. patent IDS practice: From "submit everything just in case" to "rule-based selection"
Shigeki Takeuchi, Partner, Kim and Stewart LLP; California attorney, U.S. patent agent, Japanese patent attorney (Summary translation; case discussions omitted) Replace indiscriminate IDS submissions with rule-based selection considering relevance, cumulativeness, timing, cost and future enforceability. This does not mean abolishing IDS submissions: the disclosure duty remains. Adopt reasonable criteria and record non-submission reasons.
