Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

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: 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

日本語版 Article information Article type: Case note Category: Trademarks Topics: Examination and appeal practice、Contracts First published on this site: 2026-10-10 Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10 [Trademarks] IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10061 — “CONART” (Judge Honda) *Take care with jointly owned trademarks! The trademark was jointly owned by the plaintiff (Raffles Global) and Japan Raffles. The JPO decision found that only Japan Raffles had entered into the l

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

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

Selecting a particular species without contesting the examiner's definition or limitation of the species creates a risk that non-elected species will be regarded as excluded from the claim scope. ⇒ As claim 73 was withdrawn without contesting the examiner's characterization, its features were held to have been excluded.

*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.

Practical patent-examination tasks were tested using cloud models (GPT, etc.) and on-premises models (Llama, etc.). Introducing generative AI presents distinctive challenges absent from conventional AI. Addressing hallucinations: Limiting tasks to reducing information (summarization) or transforming it (translation), rather than increasing it (creative answers), effectively minimizes risk.

1. Classification and identification of goods/services in virtual spaces Examination practice in different countries and regions shares the following understanding. “Virtual goods” alone is unclear in scope; the relevant content must be specifically identified, as in “downloadable virtual clothing.”

1. The core of Japan's consent system: A reserved-consent system Unlike many other countries, Japan uses a reserved-consent system. ⇒ Consent from the cited trademark's proprietor alone does not secure registration. Registration under Trademark Act Article 4(4) is allowed only if the JPO ultimately finds no likelihood of confusion as to source.