Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

Japanese version: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7513747137831104514-ja Article information Article type: Case note Categories: Patents Issues: Support requirement Published on website: 2026-10-08 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-08 IP High Court, Reiwa 5 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10098 — Laundry detergent composition (Judge Shoji) *Even an effect rated “3” constitutes a certain degree of effect. → Support requirement satisfied. (Excerpt from the judgment,

Japanese version Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Issues: Inventive step, Motivation and teaching away, Support requirement First published on this website: 2026-10-03 Court: Intellectual Property High Court Case number: Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10043 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10043 [Elastoplastic hysteretic damper] <Presiding Judge Honda> 1. <Ko 1 + Ko 2, etc.> The plaintiff argued that it was easy to

Japanese version Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Issues: Claim interpretation, Support requirement First published on this website: 2026-10-03 Court: Tokyo District Court Case number: Reiwa 5 (Wa) 70380 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 5 (Wa) 70380 [Rod-shaped light] <Presiding Judge Takahashi> Claim elements not satisfied; support requirement violated. The defendant's products 1 and 2 store a color throu

日本語版: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7511584712189022208-ja Article information Content type: Publication review Categories: Patents Issues: Disclaimer claims / Inventive step / Added matter / Clarity / Support requirement First published on this site: 2026-10-03 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 [Article / Patents] Examination of the limits of claims with disclaimers (Kenji Tanaka et al., Patent, June 2025) 1. Analysis of JPO decision trends

日本語版: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7511585358439104512-ja Article information Content type: Case note Categories: Patents Issues: Inventive step / Support requirement First published on this site: 2026-10-03 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 7 (Wa) 70141 [Inactivated Vaccine Preparation and Method for Preventing Infectious Disease] <Presiding Judge Nakashima> ① It would have been easy for a person skilled in the

<Supreme People's Court of China, (2020) 最高法知行終407> 1. Consideration of the Supreme Court judgment Patent: A numerically limited invention combining charge cut-off voltage (over 4.2 V up to 5.8 V) and positive/negative electrode ratio (1:1.0–1:2.5).

Since the specification consistently states “angular velocity,” correction (reinterpretation) as a clerical error to “angular acceleration” is not permitted. ⇒ The claimed invention (including a physically contradictory formula) cannot be said to be described in the detailed description of the invention, and violates the support requirement.

Failure to meet the support requirement (+ lack of inventive step) “Lactococcus garvieae of a serotype that is neither KG− nor KG+” also includes type III Lactococcus garvieae, observed from 2021 onward. The specification contains no disclosure whatsoever of a vaccine preparation against streptococcosis caused by type III bacteria, and an inactivated type III vaccine is ineffective against streptococcosis caused by type II bacteria.

Under what conditions does a claim that numerically limits only the impurity content of a known substance satisfy “inventive step” and the “support requirement”? 1. Inventive step: The “limits” of conventional methods are key Reducing impurities itself is often considered an “obvious problem.” Inventive step therefore depends on whether the value is achievable by extending conventional methods.

(Hideki Takaishi, Nakamura & Partners) [Some case introductions omitted] 1. Central message of the video