Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

日本語版: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7512399678219513856-ja Article information Article type: Case note Categories: Patents・China・Europe Issues: Litigation procedure First published on this website: October 5, 2026 Case information: Osaka District Court, Reiwa 6 (Wa) 2705 [Angle-adjustable hinge] <Presiding Judge Takemiya> Display and classification checked: October 5, 2026 Osaka District Court, Reiwa 6 (Wa) 2705 [Angle-adjustable hinge] <Presiding Judge

Japanese version Article information Article type: Case note Classification: Patents Issues: Litigation procedure First published on this site: 2026-10-03 Court: Tokyo District Court Case number: Reiwa 5 (Yo) 30214 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-03 Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 5 (Yo) 30214, petition for a provisional injunction <Presiding Judge Sugiura> ★ Before the same presiding judge, Sugiura, the patentee lost in the action on the merits, reversing the earlier out

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7511949593815744513-ja Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Issues: Litigation procedure; examination and appeal practice Court: Intellectual Property High Court Case number: Reiwa 7 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10096 First published on this website: 2026-10-03 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 IP High Court, Reiwa 7 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10096 [Undried Paste Tea] <Presiding

日本語版: https://www.takaishihideki.com/single-post/linkedin-7511585694721433600-ja Article information Content type: Case note Categories: Patents Issues: Request for examination / PCT applications / Administrative litigation First published on this site: 2026-10-03 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03 Reiwa 7 (Gyo-Ko) 10001 [Appeal in an action seeking revocation of an administrative disposition] <Presiding Judge Masuda> The original judgment held that there was no i

= Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 6 (Wa) 70083 * A separate action claimed consumption-tax-equivalent amounts not claimed in the earlier proceedings, but was dismissed as inadmissible for violating good faith.

1. Choice of jurisdiction District courts with specialized IP divisions tend to have low grant rates of around 40% (Tokyo District Court IP division statistics). The article's author, however, has achieved a 100% grant rate by applying to summary courts and recommends using them.

*Revocation of a trial decision granting a patent was sought. ⇒ Action dismissed as inadmissible. In the appeal against refusal of the patent application, the plaintiff sought a trial decision reversing the dismissal of an amendment, reversing the original refusal based on that amendment (Amendment 1), and allowing the patent.

1. Legal position of judicial research officials Under Courts Act Article 57 and Code of Civil Procedure Article 92-8, they may ask parties questions on factual and legal matters and directly question them during examination of evidence. Most have experience as JPO trial examiners, but patent-attorney positions comprise one at the IP High Court (mechanical field) and one at the Tokyo District Court (chemical field). The term is three years.

The trial decision rejecting invalidation identified a difference: the invention’s “information provision apparatus” was a single apparatus, whereas the primary cited invention’s “learning and daily-life support system 1” included multiple apparatuses—a “learning and daily-life support server 2” and a “user terminal 3.” It therefore recognized novelty and inventive step.

The IP High Court reversed the Osaka District Court’s treatment of adding a patent claim as an “amendment of the action” (Code of Civil Procedure, Article 143), holding that it was “submission of a means of attack or defense” (Article 157). The reason lies in the Patent Act’s basic structure of granting one patent right per patent application.