The original judgment is set aside. The appellee's claim is dismissed (appellee = Mutsu Electric Appliances Co., Ltd.'s rights are invalid). This is the 330th case.
The original judgment is set aside.
The appellee's claim is dismissed (appellee = Mutsu Electric Appliances Co., Ltd.'s rights are invalid). This is the 330th case in which the appellee's patent rights have been declared "invalid" by the Intellectual Property High Court.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1k6HMYI6yPxGBOQEvg1f3ezeOdySe62KT/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103290795915107156428&rtpof=true&sd=true
The original judgment is set aside. The appellee's claim is dismissed (appellee = Mutsu Electric Appliances Co., Ltd.'s rights are invalid).
This is the 330th case where a patent held by a defendant has been declared "invalid" by the Intellectual Property High Court.
It is unclear whether the defendant, Mutsu Kaden Tokki Co., Ltd., the patent holder, verified the "validity" of its patent No. 4,802,252 (Continuous Shell Fastener and Rolled Continuous Shell Fastener).
"Validity" means, for example, conducting an "invalidation document investigation" on one's own patent, being confident that the patent is solid even if an "invalidation trial" is filed by a third party such as an interested party.
Despite this, Mutsu Kaden Tokki Co., Ltd. believed that the patent granted by the Japan Patent Office was valid and sued Shinwa Co., Ltd. and others for patent infringement.
The Tokyo District Court, the first instance instance, ruled that "Defendant Product 1 is an infringement of the Plaintiff's patent right in question," and the plaintiff, Mutsu Kaden Tokki Co., Ltd., won the case.
However, the Intellectual Property High Court ruled that the original judgment was overturned and further ruled that "Inventions 1 to 3 were publicly known in Japan before May 24, 2006, the date on which the patent application is deemed to have been filed, and therefore lack novelty and cannot be patented."
Mutsu Kaden Tokki lost the case.
The reasoning for this was that "the inventions in question are publicly known inventions and are also inventions described in distributed publications."
This is "public working" under Article 29, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the Patent Act, which means "the invention is worked in a situation where the contents of the invention are known to an unspecified number of people."
Therefore, we believe that the Japan Patent Office should not have granted a patent to Mutsu Kaden Tokki's application.
The Intellectual Property High Court has not made a decision on Exhibits 20 (JP Patent Publication No. 2002-136241) and 22 (JP Patent Publication No. 2004-208619) presented by the defendant in the Tokyo District Court.
Therefore, it is unclear whether these two Exhibits are "prior art documents" of the patent application in question.
The Intellectual Property High Court has invalidated the patent in question solely from the standpoint of "public implementation."
Furthermore, I am attaching materials such as "Selection of search terms and classifications (FI, F-terms) and creation of search formulas," "Specific examples," "Searches using insufficient and irrelevant "logical search formulas" conducted by searchers at a registered search organization," and "Patent documents that searchers at a registered search organization (AIRI Co., Ltd.) could not find."
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HbNt9hLUBFNm0Lw37czHAj_-JhYjRMAC/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103290795915107156428&rtpof=true&sd=true
（Hashtag）
#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