P1253037198CGPnH - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Title: P1253037198CGPnH


1
(No Transcript)
2
The Japanese judicial system does not include a
jury system An appeal from the first instance
judgment is made along with the subsequent
proceeding. In many IP cases that come to the
Supreme Court, the Justices are required to
decide issues of law.
3
III. Characteristics of claim interpretation
in Japan
III)            Supreme Court Rights Abuse
Decision   The Fujitsu LTD vs. Texas
Instruments case, the so-called Kilby patent
case / Judgment, April 11, 2000  
Before the abuse of rights theory was introduced
by the Supreme Court, judges struggled with how
to manage patents in a narrow technical field
that was jammed by many patents.
4
On March 8, 1991, the Supreme Court
said Finding the summary of the invention in
the patent application as a premise for examining
the requirements for the patent should be based
upon the description of the scope of claims
5
Paragraph 2 of Article 70 on Patent Act was added
on the year of 1994. 70. Technical scope
of patented inventions 1. The technical
scope of a patented invention shall be determined
on the basis of the statements of the patent
claim(s) in the specification attached to the
request. 2. In the case of the preceding
subsection, the meaning of a term or terms of the
patent claim(s) shall be interpreted in the light
of the specification excluding the patent
claim(s) and the drawings.
6
IV. Typical Matters Related to Claim
Interpretation
In IP cases, the technical assistants are
selected by their technical expertise, are
appointed by the courts, and assist the judges
as members of their staff.
7
The National Agenda
Within the Tokyo High Court there are now 16
judges who hear
IP cases.
8
V. Conclusion