Tokyo District Court, 2005 (Wa) 14346 [Top-Level Setting Aid] <Ichikawa>
更新日：3 日前
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: Patents
Topics: —
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2024-09-09 (Japan time). Full English translation.
Tokyo District Court, 2005 (Wa) 14346 [Top-Level Setting Aid] <Ichikawa>
The accused product integrated the two configurations of claim elements B and D2.
⇒ (1) The claims do not exclude an integrated structure. + (2) No evidence shows a different mechanism for solving the problem (restraining force).
⇒ Claim limitations satisfied
Cf. Osaka District Court, 1998 (Wa) 7191
(Excerpts from the court's reasoning)
Claim element B2 of Invention 1 states that “an upper wing portion 2 extending horizontally and perpendicular to the aid body 1 is fixed to the upper portion of the aid body 1,” while element D2 states that “a lower wing portion 3 extending …vertically and perpendicular to the aid body 1 is fixed to the lower portion.” The wording does not exclude a lower wing portion 7 positioned directly beneath and integrated with upper wing portion 2….
There is insufficient evidence to establish that the mechanism generating the restraining force asserted by the defendant differs depending on whether upper wing portion 2 and lower wing portion 7 are integrated….
Translator’s notes (editorial)
The summary names element B, whereas the quoted judgment names B2. Both source labels are preserved.
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.
