necessary

Practice Areas

▼Our practice areas include:

(1) filing and prosecuting domestic applications for patents, utility models, designs, trademarks and service marks,

(2) filing and prosecuting international patent applications,

(3) demands for trials, such as trial against a decision of rejection, trial for invalidation, and trial for correction,

(4) appeals before the Tokyo High Court against the trial decisions rendered by the Japan Patent Office,

(5) handling of foreign applications on behalf of Japanese and foreign applicants,

(6) maintenance, assignments and management of intellectual property portfolios, and

(7) translations of documents necessary for patent applications and translations of any other documents.

Samples

The following is a list of some examples of US patents obtained through our firm.

We suppose that it might be rather difficult for most of the non-Japanese clients to evaluate the quality of our works done for Japanese IP rights.

For such non-Japanese clients, the US patents listed may be useful for evaluating our abilities. We always dedicate tremendous efforts to draft English claims and specifications properly. For example, in the case of PCT applications, we draft Japanese specifications for PCT based on Japanese patent applications which had often been prepared and filed through other Japanese IP firms or by Japanese applicants themselves.

We usually make considerable modifications to the original Japanese specifications and claims for filing PCT applications. Especially in the case where the basic Japanese application has not been filed through our firm, we thoroughly check the application and usually redraft the claims into a form which has more clear and logical construction and can cover a desired protective scope, and also redraft the specification by supplementing information necessary to enable the invention or information which might be useful in the later prosecution stage for overcoming possible rejections.

Therefore, it can be said that, in many cases, the US patents are our translations of the Japanese language PCT specifications drafted by our firm.

We sometimes ask US patent attorneys to check our drafts of English specifications, but they usually find that no substantial change is necessary.

In addition, during the prosecutions of the foreign patent applications, our draft responses (amendments and arguments) are usually submitted to the patent offices without any substantial changes or with only minor changes.

Consequently, we believe that the US patents listed here would be of great help for you to evaluate our skills in IP business.

The documents which we prepare have been highly esteemed by the foreign patent attorneys.

タグ:

PCT  application  or  be  patent  Japan  an  Japanese  not  filing  with  filed  claim  at  one  invention  claims  any  has  applications  office  file  only  been  case  such  use  other  into  IP  may  we  more  documents  specification  all  but  right  non  We  necessary  also  amendment  through  information  based  patents  translations  applicant  would  so  amendments  ex  possible  high  rights  foreign  following  time  said  scope  re  end  rejection  without  business  English  obtained  form  prepared  cases  Therefore  out  skill  quality  example  many  during  prosecution  do  clients  substantial  stage  usually  firm  response  translation  some  where  ep  clear  obtain  original  later  make  side  had  document  construction  basic  they  her  specifications  firms  per  applicants  am  work  always  addition  arguments  attorneys  drafted  often  nor  cover  submitted  times  useful  listed  There  specific  draft  highly  desired  change  exam  done  Consequently  able  amend  language  late  up  over  reject  minor  most  skills  submit  help  special  offices  abilities  man  list  low  logical  might  rather  red  redraft  prosecutions  protective  considerable  great  examples  evaluating  esteemed  evaluate  ed  find  invent  attorney  believe  inform  check  changes  suppose  Especially  works  way 

米国での審査における実施可能性、新規性、非自明性の判断基準について

米国での審査通知への回答書において米国代理人が米国審査基準(MPEP)に参照して実施可能性・新規性・非自明性の法律的基準について述べた説明で、原則的な部分を理解する上で参考になるものがありましたので、多少補足を加えた上で、以下に紹介します。参考までに、英語と日本語訳文の両方を併記します。

Legal Standard for Enablement(実施可能性の法律的基準について)

The Federal Circuit has repeatedly held that "the specification must teach those skilled in the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without 'undue experimentation'." In re Wright, 999 F.2d 1557, 1561, 27 USPQ2d 1510, 1513 (Fed. Cir. 1993).(連邦巡回裁判所はたびたび、以下の趣旨の判断を示してきた:「明細書は、当業者が『過度な実験』を行なうことなく本発明の全範囲を実現して使用するための方法を教示しなければならない」)

Nevertheless, not everything necessary to practice the invention need be disclosed. In fact, what is well-known is best omitted. In re Buchner, 929 F.2d 660, 661, 18 USPQ2d 1331, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 1991).(しかし、発明の実施に必要な全てを開示する必要はない。実際、周知のものは省略しても構わない。)

All that is necessary is that one skilled in the art be able to practice the claimed invention, given the level of knowledge and skill in the art. Further the scope of enablement must only bear a "reasonable correlation" to the scope of the claims. See, e.g., In re Fisher, 427 F.2d 833, 839, 166 USPQ 18, 24 (CCPA 1970).(必要なことは、当業界の知識と技術の水準に鑑みて、クレームされた発明を当業者が実施できるように記載されていることだけである。)

As concerns the breadth of a claim relevant to enablement, the only relevant concern should be whether the scope of enablement provided to one skilled in the art by the disclosure is commensurate with the scope of protection sought by the claims. In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1236, 169 USPQ 236, 239 (CCPA 1971).(実施可能性との関連におけるクレームの広さについては、明細書の開示により当業者に提供された実施可能性と、クレームが要求する保護の範囲とが一致していさえすればよい。) How a teaching is set forth, by specific example or broad terminology, is not important. In re Marzocchi, 439 F.2d 220, 223-24 169 USPQ 367, 370 (CCPA 1971).(教示の記載の仕方については、どのように記載されていても構わず、具体的実施態様による記載でもよいし、広い用語による記載でもよい。)

Legal Standard for Determining Anticipation(新規性判断の法律的基準について)

"A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference." Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987).(クレームに記載される全ての要素が明示的または潜在的に単一の先行技術文献に記載されている場合にのみ、クレームの新規性が欠如する。)

"When a claim covers several structures or compositions, either generically or as alternatives, the claim is deemed anticipated if any of the structures or compositions within the scope of the claim is known in the prior art." Brown v. 3M, 265 F.3d 1349, 1351, 60 USPQ2d 1375, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (クレームが複数の構造や組成物を含む場合には、複数の構造または複数の組成物のいずれか1でも先行技術文献に記載されているならば、クレームの新規性が欠如する。)

"The identical invention must be shown in as complete detail as is contained in the ... claim." Richardson v. Suzuki Motor Co., 868 F.2d 1226, 1236, 9 USPQ2d 1913, 1920 (Fed. Cir. 1989).(クレームされるものと詳細まで完全に一致する発明が示されていることが必要である)

The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990).(クレームが要求する通りに要素が配置されていることが必要であるが、用語が同一である必要はない。)

Legal Standard for Prima Facie Obviousness (一応の自明性の判断の法律的基準について)

MPEP § 2141 sets forth the guidelines in determining obviousness. First, the Examiner has to take into account the factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), which has provided the controlling framework for an obviousness analysis.(MPEP § 2141には、自明性を判断するガイドラインが示されている。審査官は、まず、グラハム事件で採用された事実認定基準(いわゆる、Grahamテスト)を考慮しなければならない。) The four Graham factors are(4つのGrahamテストは以下の通りである):

(a) determining the scope and contents of the prior art(先行技術の範囲と内容を決定すること);

(b) ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims in issue(先行技術と当該クレームとの差を明確にすること);

(c) resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art(当業者の技術水準を確定すること); and

(d) evaluating any evidence of secondary considerations(二次的考慮事項の証拠を評価すること). Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).

Second, the Examiner has to provide some rationale for determining obviousness.(次に審査官は、自明性を支持するための何らかの論理付けを提示することが必要である。) MPEP § 2143 sets forth some rationales that were established in the recent decision of KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007)(MPEP § 2143には、KSR事件で確立された論理付けが示されている。). Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include(自明性を支持するための典型的な論理付けは以下の通りである。):

(a) combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results(先行技術の要素を公知の方法で組み合わせて予想可能な結果を得ること);

(b) simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results(ある公知の要素を他の要素で単純に置換して予想可能な結果を得ること);

(c) use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way(公知技術を用いて類似の装置(方法や製品)を同様に改善すること);

(d) applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results(改善可能な状態にある公知の装置(方法や製品)に公知技術を適用して予想可能な結果を得ること);

(e) "obvious to try" - choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success(「試みることが自明」-成功するという合理的な期待を持って、特定された予測可能な有限個の解決方法から選択すること);

(f) known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art(ある技術分野において公知のものは、設計上の動機やその他の市場の力に基づいて、同じ技術分野や異なる技術分野で使用するためのバリエーションが当業者によって予測可能であれば、そのようなバリエーションを促すかもしれない。); and

(g) some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.(先行技術文献を改変したり先行技術文献の教示を組み合わせてクレームされた発明に到達するように当業者を導いたであろう、先行技術における教示、示唆または動機。)

As the MPEP directs, all claim limitations must be considered in view of the cited prior art in order to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP § 2143.03.(MPEPが示すように、一応の自明性を確立するためには、引用例に鑑みてクレームの全ての限定事項を考慮する必要がある。)

タグ:

米国  クレーム  発明  日本  新規性  記載  必要  明細書  以下  審査  or  be  先行技術  判断  可能  英語  審査官  開示  適用  要求  方法  an  範囲  説明  可能性  not  選択  本発明  with  同様  design  考慮  具体的  日本語  claim  明確  実際  使用  審査通知  同一  特定  公知  先行技術文献  EP  文献  at  技術  one  引用  art  当業者  基準  rce  採用  invention  事件  実験  実施  claims  any  証拠  提供  内容  理解  has  審査基準  prior  非自明性  結果  MPEP  通知  詳細  複数  関連  entity  only  ガイドライン  case  within  solution  決定  参照  代理人  Inter  分野  限定  use  技術分野  other  into  参考  issue  自明性  may  要素  自明  we  should  method  specification  合理的  between  Fed  原則的  事項  results  提示  all  but  right  解決  評価  組成物  類似  must  necessary  same  示唆  用語  趣旨  based  明示的  保護  部分  回答  KSR  obviousness  態様  would  so  欠如  ex  Cir  両方  知識  consideration  practice  製品  required  scope  認定  reasonable  状態  回答書  re  新規性判断  similar  ライン  disclosure  each  end  without  Q2  2d  single  置換  national  教示  完全  Further  identified  法律  装置  公知技術  到達  International  成功  claimed  米国代理人  out  shown  skill  need  周知  一応  example  予測  Ex  USPQ2d  Examiner  期待  skilled  secondary  引用例  either  provide  典型的  当該  テスト  differences  provided  test  裁判所  were  known  very  潜在的  補足  given  some  ep  those  確立  予想  protection  仕方  obtain  structure  make  side  明示  set  ordinary  reason  knowledge  well  include  実施可能  reference  原則  teach  cited  another  difference  device  実施可能性  determining  different  limit  Graham  decision  important  3d  USPQ  動機  her  found  per  elements  element  am  work  whether  apply  technique  product  predictable  実現  支持  term  evidence  enablement  非自明  his  forth  rolling  result  expectation  全範囲  order  事実  紹介  訳文  success  described  disclosed  論理  cover  代理  一致  二次的考慮事項  vice  what  単一  単純  prima  products  contained  composition  require  法律的基準  ratio  改善  Legal  deemed  obvious  number  methods  裁判  act  Second  設計  closed  omitted  less  構造  lines  確定  CCPA  specific  she  facie  facto  field  every  four  due  how  First  技術水準  analysis  devices  予想可能  combine  correlation  組成  certain  exam  established  Federal  How  配置  able  actual  Standard  Obviousness  論理付  view  verbis  variations  show  up  ipsissimis  own  日本語訳  over  多少  now  motivation  support  市場  teaching  take  改変  新規  過度  二次的  予測可能  省略  先行  明細  解決方法  設計上  業界  バリエーション  See  oa  Wright  limitations  account  according  Teleflex  mm  Prima  range  read  rationales  John  relevant  relation  recent  red  framework  fr  full  force  considered  content  hard  considerations  contents  establish  evaluating  everything  ed  experimentation  fact  ip  invent  broad  anticipated  arranged  conclusion  compositions  inherently  All  suggestion  try  Facie  terminology  undue  An  simple  yield  Circuit  sets  several  structures  Deere  way 

《特許出願明細書》

分野 : バイオテクノロジー(細胞生物学) (和英)

原文:

更に、MAPKキナーゼの活性化には、キナーゼドメインVIIとVIIIの境界領域にある2つのセリン及び/又はスレオニン残基(即ち、2つのセリン残基、2つのスレオニン残基又はセリンとスレオニン残基)のリン酸化が必要で、このリン酸化を担うセリン/スレオニンキナーゼをMAPKKキナーゼ(MAPKKK)と総称する。前記のRaf-1はMAPKKキナーゼの一種であり、Ras→Raf-1(即ち、MAPKKK)→MAPKK→MAPKという連鎖は、シグナル伝達の主要経路の一つである。MAPKKK→MAPKK→MAPKという3分子からなるキナーゼの連鎖をMAPキナーゼシグナルカスケードと呼ぶ。

英訳文:

For activating a MAPK kinase, it is necessary to phosphorylate two serine and/or threonine residues (i.e., two serine residues, two threonine residues, or one serine residue and one threonine residue) located in the boundary region between the kinase subdomains VII and VIII, and a serine/threonine kinase responsible for this phosphorylation is designated MAPKK kinase (MAPKKK). The above-mentioned Raf-1 is one example of MAPKK kinase, and the following cascade reaction: Ras → Raf-1 (i.e., MAPKKK) → MAPKK → MAPK, is one of the major signal transduction pathways. The cascade reaction consisting of three kinase molecules, MAPKKK → MAPKK → MAPK, is called a MAP kinase signal cascade.

分野:バイオテクノロジー(遺伝子工学) (和英)

原文:

SIIS-1発現プラスミドの構築上記(ii)で単離したSIIS-1cDNAを制限酵素XbalとPvuIIで消化し、得られた制限酵素断片をブラントエンド化し、哺乳動物発現ベクターpEF-BOSのブラントエンド化したXbalサイトに挿入した。以下、構築したSIIS-1発現ベクターをpEF-BOS/SIIS-1(SH+)とする。SH2領域を欠損した変異型SIIS-1を構築するために、pEF-BOS/SIIS-1(SH+)を制限酵素BssHIIで消化し、生じた360bpの断片を除去した。得られたSH2領 域及びC末端の領域を欠損したSIIS-1発現ベクター(即ち、SIIS-1変異ベクター)を、pEF-BOS/SIIS-1(SH-)とした。 上記で構築したpEF-BOS/SIIS-1(SH+)又はpEF-BOS/SIIS-1(SH-)のいずれか一方の発現ベクターとネオマイシン耐性遺伝子をコードするpSV2 Neoとを20:1の比率で混ぜ、M1細胞にエレクトロポレーション法で形質導入した。ネオマイシン耐性を指標とし、形質導入体(クローン)をGeneticin(米国、GIBCOBRL社製)750μg/mlを含む成長培地中で選択した。

英訳文:

Construction of SIIS-1 expression vectors: SIIS-1 cDNA isolated in step (ii) above was digested with restriction enzymes XbaI and PvuII, and the end of the obtained restriction fragment (XbaI-PvuII) was converted into a blunt end. Then, the resultant blunt-ended fragment was inserted into the blunt-ended XbaI site of the mammalian expression vector pEF-BOS. Hereinafter, the constructed SIIS-1 expression vector is simply referred to as "pEF-BOS/SIIS-1 (SH+)". For the construction of a mutant SIIS-1 which is an SH2 domain-deficient SIIS-1, a BssHII-digested fragment of 360 bp was removed from pEF-BOS/SIIS-1 (SH+). The thus obtained SIIS-1 expression vector (that is, a mutant SIIS-1 vector) which is deficient in the SH2 domain and is truncated at the C-terminus is hereinafter simply referred to as "pEF-BOS/SIIS-1 (SH-)". Each of the expression vectors pEF-BOS/SIIS-1 (SH+) and pEF-BOS/SIIS-1 (SH-) prepared above was individually mixed with expression vector pSV2 Neo (encoding a neomycin-resistance gene) at a ratio of 20:1. Subsequently, each of the resultant vector mixtures was separately transfected into M1 cells by electroporation. Using neomycin resistance as an index, the transfectants (i.e., clones) were selected in the growth medium containing Geneticin (manufactured and sold by GIBCO BRL, USA) at 750 μg/ml.

分野 : 樹脂成形 (和英)

原文:

本発明の発泡射出成形方法によれば、金型キャビティ内壁面形状の転写性が良好で、無発泡の表皮層と高発泡の発泡層を有する成形品を再現性良く、効率的、経済的に製造することができるだけでなく、成形品の表皮層の厚さおよび成形品の発泡倍率を容易に制御することができる。

英訳文:

The foam-injection molding method of the present invention is advantageous not only in that a molded article which exhibits excellent reproduction of the morphology of the inner wall of the mold cavity and which has both a non-foamed surface skin layer and a highly foamed interior portion can be produced with excellent reproducibility and high efficiency and economically, but also in that the thickness of the surface skin layer and the expansion ratio of the molded article can be easily controlled. The foam-injection molding method of the present invention can provide various excellent foam-injection molded articles of a thermoplastic resin at a low cost.

分野 : 電気工学 (和英)

原文:

本発明は、複合色素及びn型半導体を包含する光電変換素子であって、該複合色素は、互いに 異なる励起準位を有する複数の成分色素が互いに化学結合されてなり、それにより、電子移動用の直鎖又は枝分かれ構造体を形成し、該直鎖又は枝分かれ構造体は一端において該n型半導体に保持され、他端は自由端であり、その励起準位が該直鎖又は枝分かれ構造体の上記のn型半導体に保持された端部から、上記の自由端に向かって減少する順序で配列されていることを特徴とする光電変換素子に関する。

英訳文:

The present invention is concerned with a photoelectric conversion element comprising a composite dye and an n-type semiconductor, the composite dye comprising a plurality of component dyes which have different excitation levels and which are chemically bonded to each other to form a straight chain or branched structure for transferring an electron therethrough, wherein the straight chain or branched structure is, at one end thereof, secured to the n-type semiconductor and has, at least at one other end thereof, a free end, and wherein the plurality of component dyes are arranged in an order such that the excitation levels of the plurality of component dyes are decreased as viewed from the one end of the structure toward the at least one other end of the structure.

分野 : 電気工学 (和英)

原文:

本発明の光電変換素子は、光電変換性能に優れ、特に、太陽エネルギーからのエネルギー取り 出し効率(エネルギー変換効率)が高く、また、それを用いて簡便に色素増感型太陽電池を製造 することができるので、色素増感型太陽電池などに有利に用いられる。

英訳文:

The photoelectric conversion element of the present invention exhibits excellent photoelectric conversion properties, especially high efficiency in converting solar energy to electric energy (i.e., high energy conversion efficiency), and a dye sensitized solar battery can be easily produced therefrom. Therefore, the photoelectric conversion element of the present invention can be advantageously used for a dye sensitized solar battery and the like.

分野 : 樹脂成形 (和英)

原文:

文明社会はエネルギーの消費によって成立するが、そのエネルギーの大部分は、自然が長年か けて太陽光エネルギーを蓄えた化石燃料に由来する。近年、その化石燃料の減少やその燃焼に よる地球温暖化問題が、人類社会の持続的発展の足かせとなる危惧が高まっている。 これらの問題を解決するために、太陽エネルギーから直接エネルギーを取り出す研究開発が盛 んに行われている。これらの中で、太陽電池は太陽エネルギーからのエネルギー取り出し効率 (エネルギー変換効率)が高いため多くの研究が為されている。とりわけ、色素に代表される光 増感剤を用い、その励起電子を効率よく取り出すことが可能な色素増感型太陽電池は、Michae l Gratzel等によって、エネルギー変換効率が7%を超えるシステムが発表(Nature 1991,353,737参照)されて以来、複雑な製造工程を経ず、安価に製造できる次世代の太陽 電池として注目を集めている。

英訳文:

Consumption of energy is indispensable to civilized society. Most of the energy which is consumed by civilized society is derived from fossil fuels, in which sunray energy has been accumulated over many years. In recent years, the problem that the amount of fossil fuels available is being reduced and the problem that the burning of fossil fuels causes global warming have arisen, and there is an increasing fear that these problems will be obstacles to the sustainable development of human society. For solving the above-mentioned problems, various studies have been made to directly utilize sunray energy. Among these studies, the studies on solar batteries have been vigorously made, because solar batteries exhibit high efficiency in converting solar energy to electric energy (i.e., high energy conversion efficiency). Among the solar batteries, special attention has been paid to a dye sensitized solar battery, which uses a photosensitizer, such as a dye, and which is capable of efficiently taking out electrons from the photosensitizer by the irradiation of the photosensitizer with sunray. Specifically, since Michael Gratzel et al. reported a system which uses a dye sensitized solar battery having an energy conversion efficiency of more than 7 % (see Nature 1991, 353, 737), a dye sensitized solar battery has drawn special attention as the next generation solar battery which can be produced at a low cost without use of a complicated method.

分野 : 鉄鋼技術、機械 (英和)

原文:

A production line for manufacturing hot steel strips from two casting lines (a, b) for thin slabs of thickness < 100 mm, only one of which (a) is aligned with a rolling line (e, g) characterized by comprising superimposed heating furnaces with mandrel (Al, A.2; Bl, B2), one pair on line (a) and one on line (b) respectively, both provided with internal mandrel to allow winding/unwinding steps of pre-strips having thickness lower than 30 mm, further comprising a bypass length (d) between said two furnaces (Al, A2) for the endless rolling in a finishing rolling mill (g) through a roller path (e), and a transverse path (k.) for transferring said pair of furnaces (Bl, B2) from line (b) to line (a) fox the production of single strips, there being provided an induction furnace (f) downstream of said heating furnaces with mandrel and immediately upstream of said finishing rolling mill (g).

和訳文:

熱間鋼帯を製造するための製造ラインであって、厚み100mm未満の薄いスラブ製造用の2つの鋳造ライン(a)及び(b)、該鋳造ライン(a)と直列に配置されてなる、ローラーコンベア(e)及び仕上用圧延機(g)を含む圧延ライン、上下に重なり合った加熱炉(A1)及び(A2)であって、該鋳造ライン(a)で製造されたスラブから得られる厚み30mm未満の仕上前鋳片の巻き取り及び巻き出し用マンドレルを内部に有しており、該鋳造ライン(a)に設けられた加熱炉(A1)及び(A2)、上下に重なり合った加熱炉(B1)及び(B2)であって、該鋳造ライン(b)で製造されたスラブから得られる厚み30mm未満の仕上前鋳片の巻き取り及び巻き出し用マンドレルを内部に有しており、鋳造ライン(b)に設けられた加熱炉(B1)及び(B2)、該鋳造ライン(a)で製造されたスラブを、ローラーコンベア(e)を介して仕上用圧延機(g)で連続的圧延に付すためのバイパス経路(d)であって、加熱炉(A1)と(A2)との間に設けられたバイパス経路(d)、加熱炉(B1)及び(B2)を、鋳造ライン(b)から鋳造ライン(a)に移動するための横断経路(k)、及びマンドレルを有する該加熱炉の下流であって、該仕上用圧延機(g)の直上流に設けられた誘導炉(f)、を含むことを特徴とする製造ライン。

タグ:

米国  発明  必要  上記  以下  or  be  可能  方法  an  成分  制限  not  選択  本発明  with  design  問題  特徴  action  at  技術  容易  one  art  invention  原文  present  after  any  has  導入  近年  above  製造  epo  複数  report  only  been  英訳文  英訳  参照  such  II  分野  工程  use  other  into  will  system  we  more  method  than  between  made  mentioned  III  all  but  解決  problem  having  non  necessary  also  inter  through  resin  was  there  A2  go  部分  A1  consisting  発表  エネルギー  step  type  both  so  excellent  ex  high  following  有利  サイト  和英  said  steps  re  ライン  成立  years  each  end  without  直接  single  comprising  heat  obtained  SIIS  form  prepared  energy  システム  Therefore  further  SIIS  out  動物  機械  two  solar  注目  properties  example  reaction  because  many  ii  provide  kinase  amount  used  least  do  ベクター  provided  year  referred  were  component  conduct  pEF  BOS  simply  index  plurality  conversion  respect  MAPKK  where  ep  化学  複雑  バイオテクノロジー  expression  効率的  articles  DNA  主要  obtain  和訳  structure  dye  efficiency  SH  restriction  main  MAPK  wherein  like  減少  制御  available  battery  細胞  designated  article  directly  construction  being  cost  一端  different  BOS  他端  production  containing  these  一種  開発  VIII  加熱炉  various  MAPKKK  her  pEF  per  element  electric  see  vector  three  am  its  sensitized  バイ  バイオ  B2  セリン  product  太陽  キナーゼ  term  単離  構築  his  herein  rolling  result  長年  該鋳造  order  変換  訳文  経済的  paid  SH  発現  converted  thus  threonine  以来  再現  スラブ  スレオニン  安価  効率  resistance  portion  遺伝子工学  電気工学  individual  順序  reported  ratio  鋳造  Raf  attention  製造用  枝分  VII  mandrel  未満  allow  act  photoelectric  構造体  located  There  less  構造  lines  easily  由来  B1  形成  foam  furnaces  exhibits  domain  due  highly  hereinafter  serine  batteries  耐性  代表  blunt  自然  内部  色素増感型太陽電池  dyes  development  保持  マンドレル  発泡倍率  composite  complicated  簡便  ended  concerned  cells  capable  光電変換素子  cascade  exam  converting  chemical  電池  配置  コード  advantage  able  XbaI  Specifically  Nature  view  late  manufacture  和訳文  residues  半導体  残基  since  injection  separate  樹脂  成形品  up  own  pair  型半導体  over  problems  produced  photosensitizer  path  変換効率  molded  molding  mutant  my  vectors  immediately  前記  fragment  fuels  制限酵素  surface  fossil  分子  therefrom  thickness  studies  sunray  strips  special  society  taking  酸化  連鎖  mm  Xbal  II  性能  指標  電子  除去  領域  エレクトロポレーション  研究  仕上前鋳片  仕上用圧延機  移動  比率  包含  伝達  化学結合  化石燃料  樹脂成形  欠損  消化  励起準位  発展  シグナル  該直鎖又  変異  表皮層  ローラーコンベア  リン  上下  経路  バイパス  ネオマイシン  ブラントエンド  英和  自由端  next  oa  neomycin  Ras  PvuII  SH2  mold  major  man  advantageous  low  mill  mm  ml  USA  range  MAP  Hereinafter  recent  red  free  fr  fox  foamed  deficient  heating  convert  finishing  excitation  exhibit  efficiently  ed  digested  fact  human  ip  invent  branched  internal  levels  layer  arranged  coding  increasing  civilized  causes  called  chain  uses  Each  respectively  resultant  responsible  Among  skin  BssHII  site  Bl  sold  straight  separately  semiconductor  signal  way  steel  transferring  transfer  toward  Gratzel  residue  Geneticin  thereof 

PCT National Phase in Japan

Q1. What are the time limits for entering Japanese national phase under PCT Chapters I and II?

A1.  The time limit is 30 months from the earliest priority date (if any) or the international filing date of the PCT application for both Chapters I and II.

Q2. Are Japanese translations of the PCT specification, abstract and drawings necessary for entering the Japanese national phase?

A2.  Yes.  Japanese translations of the PCT specification, abstract and drawings must be filed with the Japan Patent Office.  Further, Japanese translations of amendments under PCT Article 19 and 34 (if any) should be filed with the Japanese translations of the specification, abstract and drawings.

Q3. The time limit for entering Japanese national phase is drawing near but it seems unlikely that a Japanese translation of the PCT specification can be timely prepared.  Does the JPO allow postponement of the filing of the Japanese translation? 

A3.  We can first file a “formal notice of entry into Japanese national phase” by the 30-month deadline for entry into Japanese national phase and, then, file Japanese translations of the PCT specification, abstract and drawings.  The formal notice can be prepared at our end based on the information shown in the cover page of the international publication.  The Japanese translations may be validly filed within 2 months from the date of the filing of the above-mentioned formal notice of entry.  No extra charge is necessary for such delayed filing of the Japanese translations.

Exceptions to Lack of Novelty of Invention

Q1. We understand that Japan has a grace period for avoiding certain public disclosures from constituting prior art against a Japanese application.  How long is this grace period?

A1.  The grace period defined under Article 30 of the Japanese patent law (Exceptions to Lack of Novelty of Invention) is 6 months from the date of public disclosure.

Q2. What type of disclosures is capable of taking advantage of the Exceptions to Lack of Novelty of Invention in Japan?

A2.  According to current Article 30 of the Japanese patent law (effective as of April 1, 2012), virtually any disclosure, including “inventions made public at meetings and seminars, which are not academic conference designated by the Commissioner of the Patent Office, inventions made public on TV and radio, and inventions made public through sales”, are covered by the Exceptions to Lack of Novelty of Invention.  However, a patent publication is not a non-prejudicial disclosure.

Q3. Is the grace period applicable to scientific articles published on the web? 

A3.  The 6-month grace period is also applicable to electronic publications of scientific articles.  When a scientific article is published in the form of an electronic publication in advance to the publication in print, the 6-month grace period will start from the date of the electronic publication.  This rule applies not only to a free electronic publication, but also to an electronic publication which requires registered membership and/or purchase of the publication for accessing the electronic publication.

Q4. An invention has been published as a scientific article and a basic patent application has been filed in the US within 6 months from the publication of the scientific article.  Already 10 months have passed from the publication of the scientific article, but is it still possible to enjoy the benefit of the Japanese 6-month grace period by filing a Japanese patent application claiming the Paris convention priority from the basic US application filed within 6 months from the publication date? 

A4.  No.  Claiming of the Paris convention priority does not allow the filing date in Japan to date back for the purpose of grace period.  In other words, when a basic application is filed in other country within 6 months from the date of public disclosure, and a Japanese patent application claiming the convention priority from the basic application is filed after the expiration of the 6-months grace period, the Japanese patent application cannot enjoy the benefit of the grace period.

For receiving the benefit of the 6-month grace period in Japan, the Applicant must file within the 6-month grace period either one of the following applications:

   (1) Japanese national patent application*, or

   (2) PCT application designating Japan as one of the designated states. 

* Either a Japanese patent application or a PCT application claiming the convention priority from this Japanese patent application can be filed after the expiration of the grace period and still enjoy the benefit of the grace period.

Q5. What are the steps necessary for obtaining the benefit of the Japanese 6-month grace period?  

A5.  Necessary steps are explained separately for Japanese national patent application and PCT application.

Japanese national patent application:

A patent application is filed simultaneously with a Request for Grace Period within 6 months from the date of public disclosure.  Alternatively, the Request may be omitted by stating such effect in the patent application.

Next, a Document Verifying the Request, which is signed by all applicants, is filed within 30 days from the filing date of the patent application.  Filing of a specific evidence material (such as a copy of the scientific article disclosing the invention) is not required, but it is most advisable to file the evidence material with the Document.

PCT application designating Japan:

When a PCT application designating Japan as one of the designated states is filed within the 6 month grace period, such a PCT application will obtain the benefit of the grace period even when the PCT application enters the Japanese national phase after the expiration of the grace period (i.e., within non-extensible 30 month deadline).  In this case, both the Request for Grace Period and the Document Verifying the Request are filed within 30 days from the entry into the Japanese national phase. 

[Filing of the Request for Grace Period can be omitted when “Declaration as to Non-Prejudicial Disclosures or Exceptions to Lack of Novelty” (PCT Rule 4.17(v), 26ter.1) is made at the international stage.]

The Document Verifying the Request can be prepared at our end and forwarded for execution by the applicant(s). 

タグ:

PCT  application  or  be  patent  Japan  an  Patent  Japanese  not  filing  with  design  filed  claim  period  Office  date  at  Request  one  art  invention  after  any  has  prior  applications  grace  file  only  been  case  within  such  other  into  may  months  phase  will  priority  we  under  made  all  but  Article  non  law  must  We  necessary  also  inter  through  registered  A2  Art  A1  applicant  Rule  step  against  type  Novelty  both  so  ex  effective  possible  following  What  required  even  steps  re  month  publication  disclosure  end  However  Declaration  Q2  Q1  cannot  Applicant  national  April  form  prepared  long  Disclosure  claiming  including  Invention  international  rule  simultaneously  state  public  Ex  covered  either  do  Grace  Q3  does  A3  days  stage  ep  articles  obtain  benefit  Period  Claim  material  Q4  expiration  designated  article  electronic  scientific  A4  Filing  deadline  country  basic  her  per  Document  applicants  inventions  back  entry  evidence  his  Lack  convention  designating  members  cover  Exceptions  understand  web  words  Non  Next  require  defined  ratio  allow  omitted  specific  she  states  start  explained  extensible  execution  applies  day  enjoy  certain  capable  How  According  advantage  able  Verifying  requires  separate  up  isa  over  published  most  purpose  forwarded  taking  Re  Q5  academic  low  mm  meetings  read  publications  red  passed  Paris  free  fr  current  copy  effect  ed  disclosures  fine  ip  invent  applicable  try  A5  An  Claiming  separately  signed  still 


お問い合わせ

Share | rss
ホームページ制作