Nakamura & Partners
11 July 2022
Nakamura & Partners
Japan
Newsletter (No.24) July 2022
This Newsletter summarizes legal information updated in the latest one month.
*PATENT
[Patent★] Patent Infringement Appellate Court Case demand for injunction: A Case in which, concerning the interpretation of the claim language of a plurality of “chambers”, the Intellectual Property High Court found that the defendant’s products do not satisfy the constituent elements of the patented invention of a product with the limitation “can be communicated with each other”. On the other hand, the defendant’s methods satisfy the constituent elements of the patented invention of a method without limitation. A Case in which the Intellectual Property High Court reversed the prior instance judgement which found that both defendant’s products and defendant’s methods did not satisfy the constituent elements of the patented invention.
Intellectual Property Hight Court Case No.2021 (Ne) 10007, November 16, 2021 (Presiding Judge Honda) (Prior Instance: Tokyo District Court Case No. 2018 (Wa) 29802, December 24, 2020 (Presiding Judge Tanaka）
[Patent★] “X-ray Fluoroscopic Imaging Apparatus”Case: A case in which the Intellectual Property High Court emphasized that the present invention newly took up a task in question as the problem to be solved, and denied easily-conceived property (recognized inventive step) on the ground of the difference between the problem to be solved by the present invention and the problem to be solved by the main cited invention.
Intellectual High Court Case No. 2019 (Gyo-ke 10159) April 15, 2021 (Presiding Judge Kanno)
*TRADEMARK
【Trademark Act ★】The following registered trademark, which designates “T-shirts and hats” in Class 25, is not similar to the following cited trademark and has not been registered for “unfair purposes”. Therefore, the portion of the plaintiff’s request for invalidation trial based on Article 4(1)(xv) of the Trademark Act is dismissed (Article 47(1) of the Trademark Act) due to the passing of the period of exclusion. The trial court’s decision to dismiss the portion based on Article 4(1)(vii) of the Trademark Act was not erroneous, and the decision of the invalidation trial was affirmed.
＜The Registered Trademark＞ ＜The Cited Trademark＞ Intellectual Property High Court Decision of February 22, 2022 (Case No. 2021 [Gyo-ke] 10104―Presiding Judge Ichiro OOTAKA)
*DESIGN
Simple introduction for many cases.
Hideki Takaishi (Attorney at Law & Patent Attorney) (Publishing Manager)
Nakamura & Partners
Room No. 616, Shin-Tokyo Building, 3-3-1 Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku,
*The content of this newsletter provides general information and is not legal advice.
*Nakamura & Partners was founded in 1914 and provides comprehensive IP-related services both domestically and internationally as an international IP law firm.
