top of page

Osaka District Court, Reiwa 7 (Wa) 12280 [Seawall] <Presiding Judge Takemiya>

Oct 2
1 min read

Article information

Content type: Case note

Categories: Patents

Issues: Claim interpretation / Infringement / Proof

First published on this site: 2026-10-03

Display and classification checked: 2026-10-03

Osaka District Court, Reiwa 7 (Wa) 12280 [Seawall] <Presiding Judge Takemiya>

In view of the specification and the meaning of the terminology, “packing for watertightness between the transparent resin plate and the frame” (element B③) does not mean that “it is sufficient for packing to exist in even part of the space between the transparent resin plate and the frame.” It requires “packing that makes the entire interface between the transparent resin plate and the frame watertight (preventing water leakage).”

⇒ Claim element not satisfied (the defendant's “rubber gasket” alone did not make the whole interface watertight).

+ Even treating the aluminum “retaining strip” as metal packing, proof of watertightness was insufficient.

Cf. Heisei 30 (Ne) 10034 [Solenoid] <Presiding Judge Kanno>

* “Sealing fit” does not require the end member itself to produce the effect of preventing solenoid corrosion.

⇒ The element was satisfied because the effect was produced together with an O-ring.

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

Original source shown in the LinkedIn preview: https://www.courts.go.jp/assets/hanrei/hanrei-pdf-93806.pdf

Update and correction history

Dated entries are added for corrections, supplements, classification, display, and related-article changes, separately from the first publication date.

2026-10-03: First publication on this site from the LinkedIn original.

Comments


Featured Posts

Recent Posts

Archive
Search by Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page