2015 (Gyo-Ke) 10122 [System for Dermatological Treatment] <Takabe>
Updated: 1 day ago
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: Patents
Topics: Inventive step
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-05-13 (Japan time). Full English translation.
2015 (Gyo-Ke) 10122 [System for Dermatological Treatment] <Takabe>
“It is natural to understand the ‘liquid water filter’ of Cited Invention 2 identified by the trial decision as referring to the ‘liquid water filter’ in [0077], not including the suspension filter. And …the ‘liquid water filter’ cannot be said to cool the skin.”
The trial decision concluded that combining Cited Invention 2 with Cited Invention 1 would allow a person skilled in the art readily to conceive of filtering light with a water filter while cooling the skin.
However, after examining the substantive function of the “liquid water filter” in Cited Invention 2, the court found that it was intended merely to adjust the optical spectrum and disclosed no configuration directly cooling the skin.
In other words, even considering that Cited Reference 2 also described a different form, a suspension filter (an embodiment using frozen liquid), the court pointed out that its operating principle and purpose differed. Although it might indirectly cool the waveguide until the suspension filter melted, it was a special configuration that, after melting, became a highly scattering plate and lost its filtering function. The court further concluded that the claimed invention's embodiment of keeping water constantly liquid while cooling the skin could not readily be derived from Cited Reference 2.
The court also pointed out that, even if combining it with Cited Invention 1 suggested installing a water filter instead of a prism, issues remained concerning the concept of a disposable light source, the prism's distance-maintaining function and its function as a contact surface with biological tissue, and how cooling could actually be achieved. It was difficult to recognize that substitution could be made so readily, while resolving these issues, as to negate inventive step. In particular, replacing the skin-contact surface with a water filter would present many technical challenges, including greater thickness, a more complex sealing structure and reduced transmittance, so the court considered it not to be a technique that a person skilled in the art would casually conceive.
Translator’s notes (editorial)
The descriptions of the suspension filter’s melting behavior and effects are retained as stated in the source, without technical correction.
Update history
The first-published date remains unchanged. Display maintenance, classification changes, related-article updates, and text corrections are recorded separately.
November 1, 2026: First published on this website.
November 2, 2026: Added article information, classification, topics, language navigation, related articles where the same case was confirmed, consultation guidance, and SEO. The original text and first-published date were preserved.
Comments