The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Pascal Engineering's rights invalid). This is the 336th case in which the Intellectual Property High Court has found a right invalid.

The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Pascal Engineering's rights invalid).
 
This is the 336th case in which the Intellectual Property High Court has found a right invalid.
 

 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dtlS2oK5ManOVstSNXbi4bLxg-yHQiVi/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103290795915107156428&rtpof=true&sd=true
 
Pascal Engineering Co., Ltd., the patent holder, lost an invalidation trial (Invalidation 2016-800058) filed by Cosmec Co., Ltd., which is believed to be an interested party, and the Japan Patent Office ruled that "the patent for the invention claimed in Patent No. 6291518 is invalid."
 
The judges at the Japan Patent Office ruled that "the reasons for invalidation 1 and 2 are valid, and therefore the patents for the present patent inventions 1 to 5 were made in violation of the provisions of Article 17-2, paragraph 3 of the Patent Act and the provisions of Article 36, paragraph 6, item 1 of the Patent Act, and therefore fall under Article 123, paragraph 1, items 1 and 4 of the Patent Act, and should be invalidated."
 
Here, "reason for invalidation 1" is "the amendment in question was not made within the scope of the matters described in the original description, etc., and does not satisfy the requirements stipulated in Article 17-2, paragraph 3 of the Patent Act, and is therefore unlawful." Article 17-2, paragraph 3 of the Patent Act is "violation of the addition of new matter."
 
In addition, "reason for invalidation 2" is "the present patent inventions 1 to 5, which do not describe the essential components, lack support from the original description, etc., cannot be said to be described in the detailed description of the invention in the specification, and do not satisfy the requirements stipulated in Article 36, paragraph 6, item 1 of the Patent Act." Article 36, paragraph 6, item 1 of the Patent Law is a "violation of the support requirement."
 
The patent owner, Pascal Engineering Co., Ltd., appealed the decision of the Patent Office's examiner to invalidate the patent, and filed a lawsuit with the Intellectual Property High Court, but it was dismissed.
 
The content of the Intellectual Property High Court's decision was almost the same as the Patent Office's decision, and it stated that "the plaintiff's claim is dismissed," and the reason for dismissing the claim was that "the amendment to add new matter is itself a reason for invalidation, so the patent in question should be invalidated."
 
During the examination stage at the Patent Office, the examiner (Jun Aoyama) raised the applicable provision of "Article 17-2, paragraph 3 of the Patent Law" (violation of the addition of new matter) to the applicant.
 
However, in the end, the "patent decision" was made.
 
Here again, the Patent Office's examiners' weak judgment ability is proven.
 
It is not acceptable to grant a patent based on the examiner's careless judgment at the Patent Office's examination stage.
 
Therefore, we believe that the Japan Patent Office should not have granted a patent to Pascal Engineering Co., Ltd.'s application.
 
Here, we have listed the "FI" and "F-term" from the "Application Information" of this patent publication from the second sheet onwards in this Excel document.
 
(Hashtags)
#INPIT #JPlatPat #note #OpenAI #Claude #JPO #USPTO #KIPO #EPO #Patent #ChatGPT #GPT #ChatGPT4 #Gemini #Threads #bing #bingAI #VertexAI #AI #DX #IT #DeepSeek #Copilot #BigTech #HowtoUseAI #AIImageGeneration #ITEngineer #ITIndustry #ITCompanies #ITVentures #ITization #ITSystems #ITLiteracy #ITTools #DXization #DXPromotion #DXTalent #DXCases #DXLiteracy #IPLandscape #Generative AI #DeepLearning #Work #DeepLearning #Business #BusinessSkills #BusinessModel #BusinessOpportunities #IntellectualProperty #IntellectualPropertyStrategy #IPSchool #IntellectualProperty #IntellectualPropertyRights #IntellectualPropertyHighCourt #Patent #PatentResearch #PatentLaw #PatentOffice #PatentClassification #PatentSearch #PatentAnalysis #PatentInformation #PatentHolder #PatentInvalidationTrial #Patent #ClassificationAssignment #PriorArtSearch #InfringementInvestigation #Patent #Invention #InventionSchool #SearchLogicalFormula #Examiner #Judge #Court #ApplicationInformation #TokyoDistrictCourt #IPSolutions #IntellectualPropertyStrategy #IPManagementStrategy #IPinformation #IPwork #IPactivities #IPdepartment #IPpractice #IPpractitioner #IPofficer #IPservice #IPindustry