2020 (Gyo-Ke) 10057 [Electric Bed] <Kanno>
更新日：2 日前
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: Patents
Topics: Inventive step, Motivation and teaching away
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-07-18 (Japan time). Full English translation.
2020 (Gyo-Ke) 10057 [Electric Bed] <Kanno>
*Motivation to combine was rejected because the technical fields of the primary and secondary references were far removed from each other.
⇒ Inventive step affirmed.
(Excerpt from the court's reasoning)
The Exhibit Ko 1 invention concerns a medical bed 10 and addresses the problem of setting it at a preselected vertical height according to the patient's anticipated needs. It selects, as a lower intermediate position, “a convenient height for getting into and out of the bed 10” (that height is also one at which a caregiver's or patient's feet will not be trapped even if present …). In contrast, the Exhibit Ko 3 invention … concerns a vehicle convertible-top opening and closing device. In view of the risk of objects being caught when the top closes, it addresses the problem of providing a vehicle convertible-top opening and closing device that automatically pauses just before the top is fully closed, enabling safety to be reliably checked, and further addresses the problem of avoiding discomfort to the operator. The technical fields of the two inventions are far removed from each other, and they share only the abstracted problem of avoiding the risk of trapping an object. Extracting a common problem from different inventions in such different technical fields and seeking to apply concrete solutions suited to the characteristics of each field to the other requires particular ingenuity …. … There is no motivation to apply the Exhibit Ko 3 invention to the Exhibit Ko 1 invention ….
“The … specification that ‘even if a caregiver's or patient's feet are present between the frame and the floor, they will not be trapped’ specifies the basis on which the height at which the frame stops is determined … and therefore does not make this a use invention ….”
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.
