IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10036 [Chip detection device] <Honda>

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む

Article information

Article type: Case note

Categories: Patents

Main topics: Litigation procedure / Examination and appeal practice

First published on this website: October 1, 2026

Case reference (as stated in the original): Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10036

Display/classification checked: 2026-10-10

IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10036 [Chip detection device] <Honda>

*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.

During proceedings, the plaintiff made a new amendment (Amendment 2). Ultimately, the JPO decided (English translation): “The original decision is reversed. The invention in this application shall be patented.” This granted a patent for the invention based on Amendment 2, the plaintiff's last-submitted amendment (Amended Invention 2).

⇒ Claiming that the invention based on Amendment 1 (Amended Invention 1) should originally have been patented, the plaintiff sued for revocation of the trial decision and other relief.

The judgment held that this was a disposition favourable to the plaintiff and that there was no interest in seeking revocation of a trial decision made as requested by the applicant (the applicant could not later repudiate an amendment made on its own judgment).

https://lnkd.in/g772jcRb

Original article: https://lnkd.in/gfSFn29Q

hanrei-pdf-93722.pdf

Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7510850087225352192/

Related articles

Further reading: admissibility of actions — [Case note] Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 6 (Wa) 4142 [Portable information communication device] <Presiding Judge Kokubu>

Shared topic: proceedings to revoke JPO decisions — [Publication review] [Article / IP Generally] Patent attorneys as judicial research officials (Kazumune Takamura and Yuji Iwanaga, Patent, November 2025)

Shared topic: Examination and appeal practice — [Trademarks] IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) No. 10061 — “CONART” (Judge Honda)

Updates and corrections

Substantive corrections and additions are recorded separately from classification, related links and display changes.

October 1, 2026: First publication of the author's original LinkedIn text on this website. Article type, categories, topic tags, sources and consultation navigation added.

2026-10-01 | Related articles: added reciprocal links with shared-topic or comparative grounds; original text unchanged.

2026-10-01 | Display maintenance: added case references stated in the original or language-alternate metadata; not a revalidation of legal analysis.

2026-10-01 | Name notation: replaced verified Japanese-script personal names with Roman-letter forms in this English article and its navigation. Legal analysis and original publication date unchanged.

Consultation and inquiries

Find information and contact details by consultation purpose

2026-10-10: Updated related-article links. The original article text was not changed.

2026-10-10: Standardized related-article links to their published URLs. The original article text was not changed.