IP High Court, Reiwa 5 (Gyo-Ke) 10084 [Electric impact fastening tool] <Judge Hibiku Shimizu>
Updated: 2 days ago
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: Patents
Topics: Inventive step, Motivation and teaching away, Patent corrections
First published on this website: October 2, 2026
Case number (as stated in the source): Reiwa 5 (Gyo-Ke) 10084
Display and classification checked: October 2, 2026 (not a re-review of the legal analysis)
IP High Court, Reiwa 5 (Gyo-Ke) 10084 [Electric impact fastening tool] <Judge Hibiku Shimizu>
* No inventive step.
Difference 1: Replacing an inner-rotor motor with an outer-rotor motor
Increasing torque was a well-known problem in the technical field of the cited invention (Ko 2: electric tools), and the advantages of an outer-rotor motor (Ko 1) for increasing torque were also well known.
⇒ There was motivation to replace Ko 2's inner-rotor motor with Ko 1's outer-rotor motor; a person skilled in the art could readily have done so.
Difference 2: Bonding the magnets
Fixing motor magnets with adhesive was a well-known technique.
Original article: https://lnkd.in/ehHkKG9Z
Related cases and materials
Update and correction history
Substantive corrections and supplements are recorded separately from classification, related-article, and display maintenance.
October 2, 2026: First publication of the author's LinkedIn text. Article type, classification, issue tags, source, and consultation guide were added.
Consultation and inquiries
October 2, 2026: Updated topic tags.
Comments