LESSONS WE CAN LEARN FROM PRIOR USER RIGHTS IN JAPAN

Similar documents
The New Post-AIA World

SCHEDULE OF MINIMUM CHARGES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) Plaintiff,

Post-Grant Proceedings in the USPTO

Licensing Regulations in Japan in Accordance with Japanese Patent Law

International IP Rights Tips and Tricks International Trade-mark Applications

"Grace Period" in Japan

Licensing & Management of IP Assets. Covenant Not to Sue

August 6, AIPLA Comments on Partial Amendment of Guidelines for the Use of Intellectual Property Under the Antimonopoly Act (Draft)

CUSTOMER CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS A-160 HUMMINGBIRD CUSTOMER CONTRACT N

Discovery in a patent infringement suit in Japan particularly about secrecy order (protective order)

IP Litigation in USA Costs, Duration and Enforceability

Procedures to file a request to the JPO (Japan Patent Office) for Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program

Industry IP5 Consensus Proposals to the IP5 Patent Harmonization Experts Panel (PHEP)

3. Trials for Correction

Notwithstanding Article 29, any invention that is liable to injure public order, morality or public health shall not be patented (Article 32).

How Bilski Impacts Your Patent Prosecution and Litigation Strategies. MIP Inaugural China-International IP Forum June 30, 2010, Beijing

1. The Japan Patent Office (JPO) fee schedule is changed, effective from. 2. The post-grant opposition system is abolished, and the invalidation trial

WORKSHOP 1: IP INFRINGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL FORUM SHOPPING

Patent Rights Retention by the Contractor (Short Form)

Case 1:10-cv GBL-TRJ Document 1 Filed 04/02/10 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Model Agreement SBIR/STTR Programs

Patent Invalidation Defense v. Correction of Claims Counter-Assertion in Patent Infringement Litigation

Post Grant Review. Strategy. Nathan Frederick Director, IP Services

9 The Enforcement of Patent Rights in Japan (*)

Leveraging the AIA's Expanded Prior Use Defense for Patent Infringement Claims

Patent Litigation in Japan

Date May 16, 2014 Court Intellectual Property High Court, Case number 2013 (Ne) 10043

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

Pitfalls in Divisional Practice and Recent Developments in Japan

OUTLINE AND EVALUATION OF THE DOUBLE TRACK SYSTEM IN JAPAN--- INVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS AND INVALIDITY TRIALS AT JPO

These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational and entertainment purposes to contribute to the understanding of

DATA USE AGREEMENT RECITALS

Re: JIPA Comments on the Proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative in the United States

Protection of Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits Act, B.E (2000) Translation

Inventive Step in Japan Masashi Moriwaki

Novelty. Japan Patent Office

INVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS IN JAPAN. July 25,2014 Chief Judge Ryuichi Shitara Intellectual Property High Court

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS M.D. ANDERSON CANCER CENTER TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM MANUAL

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 123 Filed 03/09/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 842

Manual of Hantei (Advisory Opinion) for Essentiality. Check

Third Party Observations, Oppositions & Invalidation Trials of Patents in Japan

INTERPLAY Patent-Related Issues in the Government Contracts Universe

Case number 2011 (Wa) 38969

INVENTION DISCLOSURE FORM

NONEXCLUSIVE LICENSE. Between. (Name of Licensee) And UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. As Represented By THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

5 Multiple Protection of Inventions

Multimedia over Coax Alliance Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Understanding Patent Issues During Accellera Systems Initiative Standards Development

Effective 08/01/2005 1/6

OUTLINE OF TRADEMARK SYSTEM IN JAPAN

Enforcement of Foreign Patents in Japanese Courts

Intellectual Property High Court

SNOMED CT Grant of License of the Swedish National Release

Civil Action No.: 9= /0 C/\j /-^

From Law of Patents, Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits, Plant Varieties, and Industrial Designs, Chapter Two:

Part I PPH using the national work products from the JPO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Patents and the Protection of Proprietary Biotechnology Information

PARTIALLY EXCLUSIVE LICENSE. Between (Name of Licensee) And UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. As Represented By THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

Q&A: Appeal and Trial Procedures

New Post Grant Proceedings: Basics by

Standing Committee on Patents. Questionnaire on the Publication of Patent Applications India Section

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES. 1. Introduction This policy is designed to achieve the following objectives:

COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AGREEMENT AND ALLOCATION OF RIGHTS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UNDER AN STTR RESEARCH PROJECT between. and

2016 Study Question (Patents)

QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY TRADEMARK LICENSE AGREEMENT

Japan Patent & Trademark Update

ITC Litigation in the U.S. MIP Global IP Briefing August 26, 2015, Singapore

APT PATENT POLICY. Edition: November Source Document: MC-37/OUT-05 (Rev.1) Adopted by

IEC ISO ITU. Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC

The Judgment can be accessed here at the website of the Delhi High Court. The Judgment can also be accessed here at India Kanoon website.

Guidebook. for Japanese Intellectual Property System 2 nd Edition

Patent Act, B.E (1979) As Amended until Patent Act (No.3), B.E (1999) Translation

The Third Amendment to the Patent Law of China. On December 27, 2008, the Standing Committee of the National People's

Section 5 Exceptions to Lack of Novelty of Invention (Patent Act Article 30)

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WORK FOR OTHERS AGREEMENT WITH A NON-FEDERAL SPONSOR. Strategic Partnership Project Agreement (SPP) No.

Pitfalls in Licensing Arrangements

IP LICENSING COMMITTEE MODEL LICENSING CLAUSES BULLETIN

Inventive Step. Japan Patent Office

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Fifty-sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:-

patentees. Patent judgment rules in Japanese legal system In this part, to discuss the patent judgment rules in Japan legal system, we will discuss th

George Mason University School of Law PATENT LITIGATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Spring Tuesdays 8:00-9:50 P.M. Classroom 329 SYLLABUS

Where to Challenge Patents? International Post Grant Practice Strategic Considerations Before the USPTO, EPO, SIPO and JPO

Procedures and Requirements for Filing a Request for Patent Prosecution. Highway Pilot Program (PPH) to the National Institute of Industrial Property

RADIO TECHNICAL COMMISSION FOR MARITIME SERVICES STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

Eastern Connecticut State University 83 Windham St., Willimantic, CT 06226

Tools and Pitfalls Recent Decisions from the EPO Boards of Appeal 20 November 2014

Chapter 2 Internal Priority

GENERAL INFORMATION ON PATENT APPLICATIONS IN JAPAN

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE INVITATION TO BID

Review of Current Status of Post-Grant Opposition System in Comparison with Invalidation Trial System

NTT DOCOMO Technical Journal. Akimichi Tanabe Takuya Asaoka Katsunori Tsunoda Makoto Kijima. 1. Introduction

ETHIOPIA A PROCLAMATION CONCERNING INVENTIONS, MINOR INVENTIONS AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS PROCLAMATION NO. 123/1995 ENTRY INTO FORCE: May 10, 1995

LICENSEE CORNELL UNIVERSITY

The Patents (Amendment) Act,

Inequitable Conduct Judicial Developments

Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act. Overview

Patent and License Overview. Kirsten Leute, Senior Associate Office of Technology Licensing, Stanford University

Transcription:

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 2012 AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting LESSONS WE CAN LEARN FROM PRIOR USER RIGHTS IN JAPAN Naoki Yoshida

Topics Article 79 of Japanese Patent Law Requirements for Prior User Rights Prior User Rights in Japan and the U.S. 2

Article 79 of Japanese Patent Law A person who, without knowledge of the content of an invention claimed in a patent application, made an invention identical to said invention, or a person who, without knowledge of the content of an invention claimed in a patent application, learned the invention from a person who made an invention identical to said invention and has been working the invention or preparing for the working of the invention in Japan at the time of the filing of the patent application, shall have a non-exclusive license on the patent right, only to the extent of the invention and the purpose of such business worked or prepared. p 3

Article 79 by NY Translation A person who, without knowledge of the content of an invention claimed in a patent application, made an invention identical to said invention, or a person who, without knowledge of the content of an invention claimed in a patent t application, learned the invention from a person who made an invention identical to said invention and [has been working the invention or preparing for the working of the invention] has actually been conducting business by practicing the invention or has actually been preparing for such business in Japan at the time of the filing of the patent application, shall have a non-exclusive license on the patent right, only to the extent of the invention and the purpose of such business worked or prepared. p 4

Closer Look at Article 79 (WHO) A person who made an invention identical to said invention or a person who learned the invention from a person who made an invention identical to said invention, without knowledge of the content of an invention claimed in a patent application (WHAT) has been working the invention or preparing for the working of the invention (WHERE) in Japan (WHEN) at the time of the filing of the patent application 5

Closer Look at Article 79 (WHAT RIGHTS) shall have a non-exclusive license on the patent right, (LIMITATION) only to the extent of the invention and dthe purpose of such hbusiness worked or prepared. 6

Policy Behind Prior User Rights in Japan Tries to balance patent rights under the first-to-file system and equitable rights of those who had been practicing the invention before the filing of the patent application Japan views prior user rights as an exception to the first-to-file t fil system Prior user rights are applicable to utility patents as well as utility models and design patents 7

Prior User Rights Requirements at the time of the filing of the patent application Will evaluate if business was said to be at the stage of being conducted or prepared for, at the time the application was filed General steps for conducting or preparing for business 1. Research and development 2. Perfection of the invention 3. Preparation for business by practicing the invention 4. Start of such business Needs to show 3 or 4 at the time of the filing of the patent application, and 1 and 2 are insufficient Actual proof of conducting or preparing for business at the time of filing is not required It is possible to prove 3 indirectly by proving 1, 2, and 4 8

in Japan Prior User Rights Requirements Business must be conducted or prepared for in Japan If all acts of conducing or preparing for business took place outside Japan, then no prior user rights A part of the acts can take place outside Japan Found prior user rights when the invention was made in Japan by a Japanese company and the company subcontracted a US company to manufacture the invention to be imported in Japan Radio case by Japanese Sup. Ct. in 1966 But the invention can be made outside Japan 9

Prior User Rights - Requirements preparing for the working of the invention Satisfied if two criteria are met: Has an intent to practice immediately Such an intent is objectively recognized immediately does not necessarily means a very short time Walkingbeam type furnace decision by Japanese Supreme Court in 1986 Facts: August 31, 1966 Specification and design drawings were submitted February 26, 1968 Effective filing date of the patent application May 1971 Furnace was manufactured for the first time The Supreme Court found an intent to practice immediately despite the fact that the actual manufacture actu took place more than 5 years after the specification cat and design drawings had been submitted The Court reasoned that it normally takes a long time from bidding proposals, receiving an order, and delivering this type of furnace. Moreover, the furnace is made upon receiving an order and is not mass-produced. The Court also considered the fact that the prior user, after the submission of the specification, requested its subcontractor an estimate for parts in case they receive an order, and the prior user participated in request for proposals every year. 10

Prior User Rights - Requirements Cases finding preparing for the working of the invention was met: A company asked a subcontractor to make a proto-type of a sweatband, received the proto-type, and shipped it to a customer. After a design patent application was filed, the company received an official order from the customer, asked the same subcontractor to make the same sweatband. Sweatband case decided by Tokyo District Court in 1991 Prior to the filing of an utility model application, a company completed a drawing for a die cast, ordered materials to make the die cast, and started to make the die cast. After the filing, the company completed the die cast, tested it, and started to sell the die casts. Monkey wrench case decided by Osaka District Court in 2005 Cases finding preparing for the working of the invention was not met: A company made some general drawings for calendar rolls, but no documents or detailed drawings were presented to show its manufacturing process. When compared with past activities related other designs by the company, one could only conclude that there was a general business plan and nothing was concrete. Calendar rolls case decided by Tokyo District Court in 2002 11

Prior User Rights - Requirements the extent of the invention and the purpose of such business worked or prepared Try to determine if the invention that has been worked or prepared for the working thereof at the time of the filing of the patent application is the same as the invention a patent right is being asserted against now Can you make a product that is different from the ones at the time of the patent application filing? Yes, prior user rights are not limited to the invention being practiced at the time the patent application was filed. It extends to any modification that is still within the same scope of the invention embodied in the practiced invention. 12

Prior User Rights - Requirements Modifications unrelated to the scope of the patented claim should be allowed, and found that the same scope requirement was met. Fork claw case decided by Osaka District Court in 1999 Modifications that provide remarkable effects should not be allowed, and found that the same scope requirement was not met. Substrate inspection machine case by Osaka District Court in 2002 13

Prior User Rights - Requirements Can you conduct a new business act after the filing of the patent application? No, you cannot change or add a new business act after the application was filed Pallet loading machine case decided by Nagoya District Court in 2005 No prior user right for a subcontractor, but a prime contractor t who hires the subcontractor t has a prior user right and can change to another subcontractor t for the same work. 14

Prior User Rights Rights Granted Royalty free non-exclusive license Can you transfer prior user rights? Yes, so long as the business involving the working of the relevant invention is also transferred, without a consent by the patentee. t Article 94 (1) Except for a non-exclusive license granted by an award under Article 83(2), 92(3), 92(4) or 93(2) of the Patent Act, Article 22(3) of the Utility Model Act or Article 33(3) of the Design Act, a non-exclusive license may be transferred only where the business involving the working of the relevant invention is also transferred, where the consent of the patentee (or, in the case of non-exclusive license on the exclusive license, the patentee and the exclusive licensee) is obtained and where the transfer occurs as a result of general succession including inheritance. 15

What Do You Need to Prove? Evidence that supports working the invention or preparing for the working of the invention is critical In many cases, Japanese courts appear to consider a series of events It is critical to generate and maintain records to support your prior user rights Labnotes, design drawings, specification Engineering reports, business plans Samples, catalogues, cost estimates, order sheets, invoices 16

Prior User Rights in Japan and U.S. Both have geographical limitations working the invention or preparing p for the working of the invention vs. commercial use at the time of the filing of the patent application vs. at least 1 year before [the effective filing date or disclosure date] Allows transfer of rights if a certain condition, including a transfer of business involving the working of the relevant invention, is met vs. transfer limited to a good- faith assignment or transfer for other reasons of the entire enterprise or line of business No restriction on sites upon transfer in Japan No express reference to abandonment of use in Japan 17

References Prior user rights guideline published by JPO on June 2006 2011 Strategic IP Management published by JPO Cases related to Prior User Rights published by JPO on September 2006, summarizing ninety cases between 1961 and 2006 http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou/s_sonota/senshiyouke y n.htm 18

THANK YOU Naoki Yoshida Tokyo Office Managing Partner Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Shiroyama Trust Tower, 33rd Floor 3-1, Toranomon 4-chome Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6033 Japan Tel: (81) 3-3431-6517 E-mail: naoki.yoshida@finnegan.com 19