Об интеллектуальной собственности Обучение в области ИС Обеспечение уважения интеллектуальной собственности Информационно-просветительская работа в области ИС ИС для ИС и ИС в области Информация о патентах и технологиях Информация о товарных знаках Информация о промышленных образцах Информация о географических указаниях Информация о новых сортах растений (UPOV) Законы, договоры и судебные решения в области ИС Ресурсы в области ИС Отчеты в области ИС Патентная охрана Охрана товарных знаков Охрана промышленных образцов Охрана географических указаний Охрана новых сортов растений (UPOV) Разрешение споров в области ИС Деловые решения для ведомств ИС Оплата услуг в области ИС Органы по ведению переговоров и директивные органы Сотрудничество в целях развития Поддержка инновационной деятельности Государственно-частные партнерства Инструменты и сервисы на базе ИИ Организация Работа с ВОИС Подотчетность Патенты Товарные знаки Промышленные образцы Географические указания Авторское право Коммерческая тайна Академия ВОИС Практикумы и семинары Защита прав ИС WIPO ALERT Информационно-просветительская работа Международный день ИС Журнал ВОИС Тематические исследования и истории успеха Новости ИС Премии ВОИС Бизнеса Университетов Коренных народов Судебных органов Генетические ресурсы, традиционные знания и традиционные выражения культуры Экономика Финансирование Нематериальные активы Гендерное равенство Глобальное здравоохранение Изменение климата Политика в области конкуренции Цели в области устойчивого развития Передовых технологий Мобильных приложений Спорта Туризма PATENTSCOPE Патентная аналитика Международная патентная классификация ARDI – исследования в интересах инноваций ASPI – специализированная патентная информация Глобальная база данных по брендам Madrid Monitor База данных Article 6ter Express Ниццкая классификация Венская классификация Глобальная база данных по образцам Бюллетень международных образцов База данных Hague Express Локарнская классификация База данных Lisbon Express Глобальная база данных по ГУ База данных о сортах растений PLUTO База данных GENIE Договоры, административные функции которых выполняет ВОИС WIPO Lex – законы, договоры и судебные решения в области ИС Стандарты ВОИС Статистика в области ИС WIPO Pearl (терминология) Публикации ВОИС Страновые справки по ИС Центр знаний ВОИС Серия публикаций ВОИС «Тенденции в области технологий» Глобальный инновационный индекс Доклад о положении в области интеллектуальной собственности в мире PCT – международная патентная система Портал ePCT Будапештская система – международная система депонирования микроорганизмов Мадридская система – международная система товарных знаков Портал eMadrid Cтатья 6ter (гербы, флаги, эмблемы) Гаагская система – система международной регистрации образцов Портал eHague Лиссабонская система – международная система географических указаний Портал eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Посредничество Арбитраж Вынесение экспертных заключений Споры по доменным именам Система централизованного доступа к результатам поиска и экспертизы (CASE) Служба цифрового доступа (DAS) WIPO Pay Текущий счет в ВОИС Ассамблеи ВОИС Постоянные комитеты График заседаний WIPO Webcast Официальные документы ВОИС Повестка дня в области развития Техническая помощь Учебные заведения в области ИС Поддержка в связи с COVID-19 Национальные стратегии в области ИС Помощь в вопросах политики и законодательной деятельности Центр сотрудничества Центры поддержки технологий и инноваций (ЦПТИ) Передача технологий Программа содействия изобретателям (IAP) WIPO GREEN PAT-INFORMED ВОИС Консорциум доступных книг Консорциум «ВОИС для авторов» WIPO Translate для перевода Система для распознавания речи Помощник по классификации Государства-члены Наблюдатели Генеральный директор Деятельность в разбивке по подразделениям Внешние бюро Вакансии Закупки Результаты и бюджет Финансовая отчетность Надзор
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Законы Договоры Решения Просмотреть по юрисдикции

Закон 2003 года «О внесении изменений в Закон «О патентах», Япония

Назад
Последняя редакция на WIPO Lex
Подробности Подробности Год версии 2004 Даты вступление в силу: 1 января 2004 г. Тип текста Основное законодательство по ИС Предмет Патенты (изобретения)

Имеющиеся тексты

Основной текст(-ы) Смежный текст(ы)
Основной(ые) текст(ы) Основной(ые) текст(ы) Английский 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


Законодательство Изменяет (1 текст(ов)) Изменяет (1 текст(ов))
Договоры Касается (1 док.) Касается (1 док.)
Данные недоступны.

№ в WIPO Lex JP057