The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Cowan's rights invalid). This is the 318th case to have been declared "invalid" by the Intellectual Property High Court.
The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Cowan's rights invalid).
This is the 318th case to have been declared "invalid" by the Intellectual Property High Court.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1P9Vovu8ZrtzOOMBoVY9O-7mZjcq2vuO1/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103290795915107156428&rtpof=true&sd=true
The patent holder, Kowan Co., Ltd., was defeated in an invalidation trial (Invalidation 2015-800183) by Giken Seisakusho Co., Ltd., which is believed to be an interested party, in the decision of the Japan Patent Office's trial division that "the patent for the invention related to claims 1 to 4 of Patent No. 4653127 is invalid."
At the invalidation trial stage at the Japan Patent Office, the plaintiff cited "Exhibit 1" (video: CD-ROM) and "Exhibit 2" (catalog) presented by the plaintiff as reasons for invalidation.
The trial judge at the Japan Patent Office then ruled that the right was "invalid."
The patent holder, Cowan Co., Ltd., was dissatisfied with this decision and filed a lawsuit with the Intellectual Property High Court, but as mentioned above, they lost there as well.
The content of the decision at the Intellectual Property High Court was almost the same as the decision at the Japan Patent Office, and "the plaintiff's claim is dismissed."
Even so, in this case, at the examination stage, the searcher (K362) was only able to find "Document Y" as a prior art document.
In addition, the examiner (Ishimura Emiko) created her own [search formula] and separately found two prior art documents and presented them to the applicant.
The applicant submitted a procedural amendment and successfully became the patent holder.
However, the patent owner lost the case at the Intellectual Property High Court, as mentioned above.
It seems that the searches conducted by the examiners of the Patent Office are mostly Japanese patent documents.
Furthermore, it seems that the above-mentioned "Exhibit 1" (video: CD-ROM) and "Exhibit 2" (catalog) are not included in the searches.
It is not acceptable to grant a patent based on a careless search by an examiner at the Patent Office examination stage.
Therefore, I believe that the Patent Office should not have granted a patent to Cowan Co., Ltd. in the first place.
Here, I have listed the "FI" and "F-term" from the "Application Information" of this patent publication (JP Patent Publication 2008-196128) on the second and subsequent sheets of this Excel document.
Incidentally, two separate invalidation trials have been filed regarding this case.
Those two cases are (Invalidated 2011-800214) and (Invalidated 2013-800015).
The plaintiff in these cases was Giken Seisakusho Co., Ltd., just like in this case, but the plaintiff lost in both cases.
The reason for this is believed to be that the evidence presented by the plaintiff was not strong enough.
（ハッシュタグ）
#INPIT #JPlatPat #note #生成AI #OpenAI #Claude #深層学習 #仕事 #ディープラーニング #ビジネス #ビジネススキル #ビジネスモデル #ビジネスチャンス #知財 #知財戦略 #知財塾 #知的財産 #知的財産権 #知的財産高等裁判所 #特許 #特許調査 #特許法 #特許庁 #特許事務所 #特許分類 #特許検索 #特許分析 #特許情報 #特許権者 #特許無効審判 #専利 #分類付与 #先行技術調査 #無効資料調査 #侵害調査 #侵害予防調査 #パテント #発明 #発明塾 #べらぼう #検索論理式 #審査官 #審判官 #AI #AIの活かし方 #AI画像生成 #IT #ITエンジニア #IT業界 #IT企業 #ITベンチャー #IT化 #IT系 #ITリテラシー #ITツール #DX #DX化 #DX推進 #DX人材 #DX事例 #DXリテラシー #Patent #ChatGPT #GPT #チャットGPT #ChatGPT4 #Gemini #Threads #bing #bingAI #VertexAI #一月万冊 #裁判所 #出願情報 #東京地方裁判所 #IPランドスケープ #JPO #USPTO #KIPO #EPO #知財ソリューション #知的財産戦略 #知財経営戦略 #知財情報 #知財業務 #知財活動 #知財部 #知財実務 #知財実務者 #知財担当者 #知財サービス #知財業界