Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10076
更新日：4 時間前
Article information
Categories: Patents
Topics: Divisional applications / Added matter / Claim interpretation
Published on this website: 2026-09-29
Case No. 2025 (Gyo-ke) 10076
[Vehicle guidance system] (Presiding Judge Masuda)
*Divisional requirements satisfied (no addition of new matter)
(Excerpts from the judgment — translated)
It should be said that there is no basis for prohibiting consideration of the common general knowledge of a person skilled in the art when interpreting the claims in identifying the gist of an invention. Further, even if there are examples in which a tollbooth is located beyond an ETC gate, element A of Invention 1 at issue states "an ETC-only entrance/exit installed at a toll road tollbooth, service area or parking area," and it is difficult to read this as premised on an arrangement in which the tollbooth and ETC gate are separated, as exemplified by the plaintiff. …
The inventions at issue and the invention described in the original specification, etc. are characterized by distinguishing vehicles capable of ETC communication from those that are not, and using a guidance device to direct vehicles capable of communication to a lane leading to the regular route (the route with an ETC gate), and vehicles incapable of communication to a branching re-entry lane. They cannot be described as inventions whose purpose is to guide only ordinary vehicles or vehicles unable to communicate normally with a roadside antenna.
Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7509876643201671168/
