IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10014 [Acceleration recovery generator] <Judge Miyasaka>
Updated: 4 days ago
Article information
Article type: Case note
Categories: Patents
Issues: Patent eligibility, Enablement
Published on website: 2026-10-08
Display and classification checked: 2026-10-08
IP High Court, Reiwa 6 (Gyo-Ke) 10014 [Acceleration recovery generator] <Judge Miyasaka>
[Claim 1]
A motor drives a weight at the end of an arm through: (1) acceleration → (2) high-speed forward rotation → (3) deceleration (recovering “surplus energy” through regenerative braking) → (4) low-speed backward rotation.
⇒ The angular velocity in (2) is the “rated operating angular velocity.” The difference in centrifugal force between (2) and (4) provides propulsion, while (3) generates electricity.
The applicant argued, among other things, that “classical mechanics is flawed” and that “a unidirectional force F can be generated with constant power consumption.” However, the premises that “E1 is a linear function of t” and “E2 is a quadratic function of t, resulting in E2 > E1” were incorrect and violated the law of conservation of energy.
⇒ The claimed subject matter did not qualify as an invention, and the enablement requirement was not satisfied.
Original article (2025-10-24):
Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7513419341078401025/
Consultation guide by purpose: https://www.takaishihideki.com/en/single-post/consultation-guide-en
Update history
The update history records only changes actually published, with dates.
2026-10-08: First publication of the LinkedIn original; display, classification, and consultation link set.
2026-10-08: Updated issue tags and classification.
Comments