Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

日本語原文 / Japanese original Article information Article type: Case note Category: Trademarks, Patents Topics: AI and intellectual property First published on this website: 2026-11-01 Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026 Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-12-09 (Japan time). Full English translation. https://ameblo.jp/hideki-takaishi/entry-12949482642.html IP High Court Grand Panel, 2006 (Gyo-Ke) 10563 [Solder Resist] A case in which an invention could be spec

日本語原文 / Japanese original Article information Article type: Reports and activities Category: Other Japanese law Topics: AI and intellectual property First published on this website: 2026-11-01 Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026 Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-08-05 (Japan time). Full English translation. https://ameblo.jp/hideki-takaishi/entry-12920940421.html When researching judicial decisions, invalidating prior art, or other facts,“Customize ChatGPT

日本語原文 / Japanese original Article information Article type: Case note Category: Patents Topics: AI and intellectual property First published on this website: 2026-11-01 Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026 Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-02-26 (Japan time). Full English translation. https://ameblo.jp/hideki-takaishi/entry-12887859081.html Osaka District Court, 1991 (Wa) 585 [Method of Manufacturing Anchors] *The contract was terminated because of defects

日本語原文 / Japanese original Article information Article type: Case note Category: Europe Topics: AI and intellectual property, Creators and inventors First published on this website: 2026-11-01 Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026 Originally published on Ameblo: 2024-11-11 (Japan time). Full English translation. https://ameblo.jp/hideki-takaishi/entry-12874579575.html [Germany/AI Inventorship] For a patent application naming the artificial intelligence “DABUS”

I came across this sentence: “Propose research and development themes based on the ‘problem’ sections of other companies’ published patent applications.” Was this a novel perspective in 2007? Could we now conduct such research using generative AI? https://www.jpo.go.jp/resources/

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Categories: United States Topics: Creators and inventors / AI and intellectual property First published on this website: 2026-10-07 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-07 [United States] HOOP v. HOOP (Fed. Cir., 279 F.3d 1004) (2002) Determining inventorship (design authorship) for U.S. design patents ⇒ The later design is similar to the earlier design and merely improves and completes it; it therefore is not a separate

日本語版 Article information Article type: Publication review Categories: United States Topics: Creators and inventors / AI and intellectual property First published on this website: 2026-10-07 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-07 [Article / United States] Determining inventorship (design authorship) for U.S. design patents (Tsuyoshi Fujimoto, AIPPI (2025), Vol. 70, No. 10) USPTO guidance α: A design created by a natural person is input into AI. ⇒ If the AI output is si

日本語版 Article information Article type: Lectures and videos Categories: Patents Topics: AI and intellectual property / IP management / Patent drafting and translation First published on this website: 2026-10-07 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-14 [Video introduction] Generative AI and prompt-driven reform in Shimadzu's IP operations [Koji Akutsu] [Samaria webinar] Annual cost savings exceeding JPY 100 million As with the move to paperless operations, reform was push

日本語版 Article information Article type: Lectures and videos Categories: Patents Topics: AI and intellectual property / IP management First published on this website: 2026-10-07 Display and classification checked: 2026-10-07 [IP Practice Online] “Analysis” is changing: The world of patent analysis evolving with generative AI (Yutaro Uemura, LeXi/Vent Co., Ltd.) (1) AI output depends heavily on the quality of the instructions (prompts) it receives, making prompt-engineering skil

日本語版 Article information Article type: Legal and examination updates Categories: Patents Topics: Inventive step / Added matter / Clarity / AI and intellectual property / Examination and appeal practice First published on this website: 2026-10-07 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 November 17, 2025 Industrial Structure Council, Intellectual Property Committee, Patent System Subcommittee 18th Meeting of the Working Group on Patent Examination Standards <Document 1> Rece