À propos de la propriété intellectuelle Formation en propriété intellectuelle Respect de la propriété intellectuelle Sensibilisation à la propriété intellectuelle La propriété intellectuelle pour… Propriété intellectuelle et… Propriété intellectuelle et… Information relative aux brevets et à la technologie Information en matière de marques Information en matière de dessins et modèles industriels Information en matière d’indications géographiques Information en matière de protection des obtentions végétales (UPOV) Lois, traités et jugements dans le domaine de la propriété intellectuelle Ressources relatives à la propriété intellectuelle Rapports sur la propriété intellectuelle Protection des brevets Protection des marques Protection des dessins et modèles industriels Protection des indications géographiques Protection des obtentions végétales (UPOV) Règlement extrajudiciaire des litiges Solutions opérationnelles à l’intention des offices de propriété intellectuelle Paiement de services de propriété intellectuelle Décisions et négociations Coopération en matière de développement Appui à l’innovation Partenariats public-privé Outils et services en matière d’intelligence artificielle L’Organisation Travailler avec nous Responsabilité Brevets Marques Dessins et modèles industriels Indications géographiques Droit d’auteur Secrets d’affaires Académie de l’OMPI Ateliers et séminaires Application des droits de propriété intellectuelle WIPO ALERT Sensibilisation Journée mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle Magazine de l’OMPI Études de cas et exemples de réussite Actualités dans le domaine de la propriété intellectuelle Prix de l’OMPI Entreprises Universités Peuples autochtones Instances judiciaires Ressources génétiques, savoirs traditionnels et expressions culturelles traditionnelles Économie Financement Actifs incorporels Égalité des genres Santé mondiale Changement climatique Politique en matière de concurrence Objectifs de développement durable Technologies de pointe Applications mobiles Sport Tourisme PATENTSCOPE Analyse de brevets Classification internationale des brevets Programme ARDI – Recherche pour l’innovation Programme ASPI – Information spécialisée en matière de brevets Base de données mondiale sur les marques Madrid Monitor Base de données Article 6ter Express Classification de Nice Classification de Vienne Base de données mondiale sur les dessins et modèles Bulletin des dessins et modèles internationaux Base de données Hague Express Classification de Locarno Base de données Lisbon Express Base de données mondiale sur les marques relative aux indications géographiques Base de données PLUTO sur les variétés végétales Base de données GENIE Traités administrés par l’OMPI WIPO Lex – lois, traités et jugements en matière de propriété intellectuelle Normes de l’OMPI Statistiques de propriété intellectuelle WIPO Pearl (Terminologie) Publications de l’OMPI Profils nationaux Centre de connaissances de l’OMPI Série de rapports de l’OMPI consacrés aux tendances technologiques Indice mondial de l’innovation Rapport sur la propriété intellectuelle dans le monde PCT – Le système international des brevets ePCT Budapest – Le système international de dépôt des micro-organismes Madrid – Le système international des marques eMadrid Article 6ter (armoiries, drapeaux, emblèmes nationaux) La Haye – Le système international des dessins et modèles industriels eHague Lisbonne – Le système d’enregistrement international des indications géographiques eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Médiation Arbitrage Procédure d’expertise Litiges relatifs aux noms de domaine Accès centralisé aux résultats de la recherche et de l’examen (WIPO CASE) Service d’accès numérique aux documents de priorité (DAS) WIPO Pay Compte courant auprès de l’OMPI Assemblées de l’OMPI Comités permanents Calendrier des réunions WIPO Webcast Documents officiels de l’OMPI Plan d’action de l’OMPI pour le développement Assistance technique Institutions de formation en matière de propriété intellectuelle Mesures d’appui concernant la COVID-19 Stratégies nationales de propriété intellectuelle Assistance en matière d’élaboration des politiques et de formulation de la législation Pôle de coopération Centres d’appui à la technologie et à l’innovation (CATI) Transfert de technologie Programme d’aide aux inventeurs WIPO GREEN Initiative PAT-INFORMED de l’OMPI Consortium pour des livres accessibles L’OMPI pour les créateurs WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Assistant de classification États membres Observateurs Directeur général Activités par unité administrative Bureaux extérieurs Avis de vacance d’emploi Achats Résultats et budget Rapports financiers Audit et supervision
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Lois Traités Jugements Recherche par ressort juridique

Loi de 2003 modifiant la loi sur les brevets, Japon

Retour
Version la plus récente dans WIPO Lex
Détails Détails Année de version 2004 Dates Entrée en vigueur: 1 janvier 2004 Type de texte Principales lois de propriété intellectuelle Sujet Brevets (Inventions)

Documents disponibles

Texte(s) principal(aux) Textes connexe(s)
Texte(s) princip(al)(aux) Texte(s) princip(al)(aux) Anglais Patent (Amendment) Act 2003        
 Patent (Amendment) Act 2003

2003 AMENDMENT TO JAPAN PATENT LAW

The Japan Patent Law was amended in 2003. The major changes are:

1. The Japan Patent Office (JPO) fee schedule is changed, effective from

April 1, 2004;

2. The post-grant opposition system is abolished, and the invalidation trial ,..

.J system is changed, effective from January 1, 2004; and

3. The practices in Unity of Invention before the JPO is changed in

compliance with PCT-type Unity of Invention, effective from January 1, 2004.

1. New JPO Fee System

1. 1. New JPO Fee Schedule

The new JPO fee schedule is summarized in the following table.

Basic fee (JPY)

Filing fee

Fee for Request for

Examination

1-3rd annuities (/year)

4-6th annuities (/year)

7-9th annuities (/year)

10-25th annuities (/year)

*: per claim

1.2 Transition of Fee Schedule

(1) Filing fee:

16,000

168,600

2,600

8,100

24,300

81,200

Additional fee*

(JPY)

0

4,000

200

600

1,900

6,400

The new filing fee shall be applied to applications filed on or after April 1,

2004.

(2) Fee for Request for Examination

The new fee for reqest for examination (hereinafter referred to as

1f "examination fee") shall be applied to applications filed on or after April 1, 2004,

while the old examination fee shall be applied to applications filed before April 1,

2004.

(3) Annuities

(A) The new fee schedule shall be applied to:

i). patents issued from applications filed on or after April 1, 2004; or

ii). patents issued from applications of which examination request is

1

submitted on or after April 1, 2004.

(B) The old fee schedule shall be applied to patents issued from

applications filed AND of which examination request is submitted before April 1,

2004.

(4) Divisional Application

As to patents issued from divisional applications (JPL Art. 44, para. 2) or

converted applications (JPL Art. 46, para. 5 ), actual filing dates thereof shall be

basis for determining the fee schedule to be applied.

1.3. Examination Fee Refund System

Under the new fee schedule, a refund system of an examination fee is

introduced. An applicant who withdraws or abandons his patent application

may request a partial refund of the paid examination fee after a request for

examination with an appropriate fee was submitted, so long as no substantial

Office Action is issued yet. It is supposed that a half of the request for

examination fee is refunded.

2. New Invalidation Trial System

The post-grant opposition system is abolished, while the invalidation trial

is revised to allow any entity to demand an invalidation trial without interest.

Under the new invalidation trial:

i). the trial may be demanded at anytime;

ii). both parties are involved in adversary system during the trial

procedure ; and

iii) the demanding paTty may appeal against the trial decision affirming

the patent at issue to the Tokyo High Court.

2.1. Recent statistics in legal dispute over a patent right

In 2001, about 440,000 patent applications were filed and 250,000

requests for examination were submitted. Among the substantially examined

patent applications, 80,000 patent applications were finally rejected and about

20,000 patent applicants were appealed to the Board of Appeal before the JPO.

Then, about 60 cases out of the trial rejections were appealed to the Tokyo High

2

Court. It is possible to appeal to the Supreme Court if the applicant is not

satisfied with the decision held by the Tokyo High Court. About 110,000 patent

applications in all were finally granted in 2001.

Against the granted and registered patents, about 4000 oppositions and

283 invalidation trial were demanded . 161 patentees appealed against the

board revocation decision to the Tokyo High Court. Among the board decisions in lJ the invalidation trial, 156 cases were appealed to the Tokyo High Court. As to

the granted and registered patents, 220 correction trials were demanded and 10

trial decisions were appealed to the Tokyo High Court.

As to the patent infringement litigations in Japan in 2001, 153

infringement lawsuit were filed before district courts. An unsatisfied plaintiff

and/or defendant may appeal to each High Court of appropriate jurisdiction and

possibly to the Supreme Court.

2.2. Recent developments in the Patent Law concerning the trial system before

JPO and infringement lawsuit before the Court

(1). 1993 Amendments

(a) Patented claims, specification or drawings might be corrected

during an invalidation trial on the request for correction basis such that a trial for

correction might not be demanded separately.

(b) A trial for invalidation of correction was abolished.

(c) Illegitimate corrections of the claims, specification, and drawings of the

patent in the trial for correction might constitute the grounds for invalidation of

patent.

(2). 1994 Amendments

A post-grant opposition replaced a conventional pre-grant opposition.

(3). 1998 Amendments

(a) In the invalidation trial , the gist of the ground for invalidation recited

in the written demand for the tl'ial shall not be amended .

(b) New provisions were introduced to reduce the patentee's burden of

proof in proving patentee's damages in a patent infringement lawsuit.

1f 2.3. Current Amendments in the procedure of the invalidation trial

Both demandant and demandee may have opportunities to argue more

widely about patentability. Therefore, a description requirement of a trial brief

has become more strict such that the demandant shall specify a fact for grounds of

invalidity. However, the demandant may amend such grounds if:

1) the amendment does not delay the trial;

3

2) the amendment is reasonable; and

3) if the demandee agrees to the amendment;

or, alternatively, if:

1) the amendment does not delay the trial; and

4) the demandee has made a correction of the specification or drawings of

the patent.

In response to the demandant's amendments in the grounds, the

demandee still may make further correction of the claims, specification or

drawings.

2.4. Introduction of an opinion-seeking and opinion-stating system before the

Tokyo High Court

A newly introduced system enables the JPO to be involved in an

administrative court procedure brought against a trial decision made in a

invalidation trial. Therefore, the JPO may state opinion regarding the practices

of the Patent Laws and the guidelines before the JPO.

2.5. Time limits of Correction of a patent after appealing against the invalidation

trial decision

A patentee may demand a trial for correction within 90 days from his

filing date of an appeal against a decision in an invalidation trial to the Tokyo

High Court. If the patentee demands, or attempts to demand, the trial for

correction before the JPO after appealing against the invalidity decision, the

Tokyo High Court may remand the case to the JPO before the correction sought is

admitted. Thus, the patentee may correct the patent ·in the procedure of the

remanded invalidation trial.

2.6. Transitory measures

The amended Patent Law shall be applied basically depending on a

revocation filing date, a demand filing date, or an appealing date of the patent at

issue. (cf. Supplements Art. 2)

2.7. Amended provisions in the Patent Law

Opinion -seeking and opinion-stating system

Article 180bis:

"1. Where a lawsuit under Art. 179 proviso has been filed, the court may require

the Commissioner of the Patent Office to state an opinion regarding the

application of Patent Law 01' other matters necessary for the case in question.

4

:7

------�- .- ---

2. Where a lawsuit under Art. 179 proviso has been filed, the Commissioner of the

Patent Office may state, under the permission of the court, an opinion regarding

the application of this law or other matters necessary for the case in question.

3. The Commissioner of the Patent Office may have an office personnel of the

Patent Office designated by him state the opinion prescribed under the preceding

two paragraphs."

Time Limits for filing a trial for correction after appealing to the Tokyo High

Court against trial decision

Article 126:

"2. A correction trial cannot be demanded since a trial for patent invalidation is

pending at the Patent Office until a trial decision comes to be final and concluded.

However, this provision shall not apply to a period of within 90 days (excluding a

period after a court decision or a ruling has been final and concluded, where a

court decision for reversing the trial decision under the provision of Art. 181, para.

1 has been rendered, or a ruling for reversing a tnal decision under the provision

of the same Article, para. 2 has been rendered) calculated from the date when a

lawsuit for canceling the decision of patent invalidation trial is filed:"

Remand ex officio to the trial for invalidation

Article 181:

"2. Where an appeal against the decision of patent invalidation trial under Alt.

178, para. 1 has been filed, and where the patentee has filed or intends to file a

correction trial for the patent on which the lawsuit has been lodged, the court may

reverse the trial decision by their ruling in order to remand the case to the Trial

Procedure, if the court recognizes that the case should appropriately be

reconsidered during the patent invalidation trial proceedings for invalidating the

patent in question.

3. Where the court intend to decide in accordance with the preceding paragraph,

the court must hear the opinion from the parties concerned.

4. The decision under para. 2 shall be effective to Trial Examiners and the other,

third parties.

� 5. When the court's decision for reversing the trial decision or rule under para. 1,

or the ruling for reversing the trial decision under para. 2 has become final and

concluded, the Trial Examiners shall cany out a further trial examination and

render a trial decision or ruling."

3. Unity oflnvention

5

The previous Art. 37 for so-called Unity of Invention stipulates two or

more inventions, each of which is recited in each claim, may be included in one

patent application if a specified invention recited in a claim has a specific

relationship with the other inventions. Since the specified invention may be

recited in any one of the claims, the Examiner has to identify each claim as the

specified invention. Therefore, the workload of the Examiner is too much and

the scope of the Unity of Invention tends to be broad.

The amended Art. 37 stipulates that the new Unity of Invention shall be

defined in the regulations such that the practices of the new Unity of Invention

will be similar to those in the PCT.

6


Législation Modifie (1 texte(s)) Modifie (1 texte(s))
Traités Se rapporte à (1 document) Se rapporte à (1 document)
Aucune donnée disponible

N° WIPO Lex JP057