The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Sapporo Holdings' rights invalid). This is the 331st case in which the Intellectual Property High Court has ruled a right invalid.
The plaintiff's claim was dismissed (Plaintiff = Sapporo Holdings' rights invalid). This is the 331st case in which the Intellectual Property High Court has ruled a right invalid.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C8zhayJKC3R4gNae9Qc2evUHs0hyzDbz/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103290795915107156428&rtpof=true&sd=true
Sapporo Holdings Limited, the patent holder, lost an invalidation trial (Invalidation 2017-800013) filed by Kikkoman Corporation, which is believed to be an interested party, and the Japan Patent Office ruled that "the patent for the invention related to claims 1 to 9 of Patent No. 5622879 is invalid."
The JPO judge cited "Exhibit 1" (JP Patent Publication No. 5-7458) presented by the plaintiff as the basis for his decision.
The patent holder, Sapporo Holdings Limited, appealed the JPO judge's decision to invalidate the patent and filed a lawsuit with the Intellectual Property High Court, but it was dismissed.
The Intellectual Property High Court's ruling was almost identical to the JPO's ruling, and "the plaintiff's claim is dismissed."
At the JPO examination stage, the examiner did not find "Exhibit 1" (JP Patent Publication No. 5-7458). The classifications ("FI" and "F-term") of "Application Information" for "Exhibit 1" (JP Patent Publication No. 5-7458) are listed on the right side of the publication.
The classifications in pink are common (overlapping) with the subject patent (JP Patent Publication No. 2014-168441), and there are not many of them. However, there are some commonalities.
Here again, it is proven that the search ability of the examiners at the Japan Patent Office is weak.
It is not acceptable to grant a patent based on a sloppy search by an examiner at the Japan Patent Office examination stage.
Therefore, I believe that the Japan Patent Office should not have granted a patent to Sapporo Holdings Limited's application.
Here, I have listed the "FI" and "F-term" from the "application information" of this patent publication (JP Patent Publication 2014-168441) from the second sheet onwards in this Excel document.
In addition, I have attached documents such as "Selection of search terms and classifications (FI, F-term) and creation of search logical 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