What will the patent office do! "Wake up Examiner!" ! It's really about sloppy and poor patent granting through "examination" (search).
What will the patent office do! "Wake up Examiner!!
It's really about sloppy and poor patent granting through "examination" (search).
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SP_v1tkG66vHorFV-6v36JcyW-OFboc1/view?usp=sharing
It has been declared "invalid" by the Intellectual Property High Court.
This is the revised version of the 75th case of "Patent Infringement Injunction Case Seen from Court Precedents" uploaded on January 27, 2024 (Saturday).
It is unclear whether Kobe Steel, the plaintiff, the patentee, has verified the "validity" of its patent No. 3,766,725 (oil-cooled screw compressor).
"Validity" means that even if a third party such as an interested party raises an "invalidation trial" by conducting, for example, an "invalid material investigation" for the company's patent, the company's patent is It is to be convinced that it is rock solid.
Despite this, Kobe Steel Co., Ltd. believed that the patent granted by the Patent Office was valid, and sued the defendant, Mayekawa Seisakusho Co., Ltd., for patent infringement.
The plaintiff won the case in the Osaka District Court.
However, the Intellectual Property High Court ruled that ``it was recognized that the patent pertaining to the invention in question should be invalidated in a trial for patent invalidation, and the plaintiff of the first instance, who is the patentee, filed a claim against the defendant of the first instance. The patent right cannot be enforced.” In the end, the appellant lost the case.
As a basis for this, "Otsu No. 114 Invention" (Japanese Patent Publication No. 51-36884) is cited as a prior art document.
This document could not be found at the examination stage of the Patent Office.
An IPCC searcher (Norihide Funada) presented four "Y documents" that do not include the above "Otsu 114 invention" (Japanese Patent Publication No. 51-36884) to the examiner.
The examiner shows the applicant the four documents presented by the searcher as they are.
After that, the applicant issued a "Written Amendment", and in the end, the examiner made a "decision of registration".
After registration, two invalidation trials were filed, but both were dismissed, and the rights continued.
In addition, it is the history after registration. It is also interesting to see the trial at the Patent Office between the plaintiff filing a lawsuit with the Osaka District Court, winning a portion of the case, and then losing the case at the Intellectual Property High Court.
In the end, it was decided that it should be invalidated by the invalidation trial.
We believe that the root cause of this case is that the Patent Office was unable to find "Otsu No. 114 Invention" (Japanese Patent Publication No. 51-36884) presented at the Intellectual Property High Court.
As long as the IPCC searcher finds the document "Otsu 114" (Japanese Examined Patent Publication No. 51-36884), I think.
By the way, the "application information" of "Otsu 114" (Japanese Patent Publication No. 51-36884) is displayed in a green frame on the right side of the gazette.
Comparing the "application information" of this patent publication (JP-A-10-122168), the only thing in common is the "theme code" (3H005).
And "FI" and "F-term" have nothing in common.
This suggests that the [search logic expression] based only on "classification" is a mistake.
You have to get the population by the search expression using the "search term".
You should always do a hybrid search of "technical subjects" in the same category.
I think that patent office examiners need to relearn correct "prior art searches" rather than so-called "searches."
A patent will not be granted based on an inadequate "search" by a patent office examiner.
Therefore, I believe that the JPO should not have granted a patent to the application filed by Kobe Steel, Ltd.
As the “administration” (the Patent Office), we should humbly reflect on the fact that the “judicial” (the court) pointed out the error and should try to correct the error.
In particular, the creation of the "search logic formula" that the examiner instructs the searchers of the registered search organization to create, or the "search logic formula" that is considered to be created by themselves should be fundamentally reformed. is.
Here, the "FI classification table" and "F-term list" of the "application information" of the patent publication (JP-A-10-122168) are listed from the second sheet onwards of this Excel document.
Furthermore, we will discuss ``selection of search terms and classifications (FI, F-terms) and creation of search logical formulas,'' ``concrete examples,'' and ``inadequate and irrelevant ``logical searches conducted by searchers at registered research organizations.''
Attach materials such as "(search) by formula" and "patent documents that the searcher of the registered research organization (AIRI Co., Ltd.) could not find."
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZHKFarPJTYCUzbQhx5_iUbZ3A0grwm9B/view?usp=sharing
(Just a side note.)
This is about the "prior art search" conducted by examiners at the European Patent Office and the United States Patent Office.
Examiners in the above countries create a search logical formula using a hybrid search formula (search term + CPC) for "technical subjects" in the same category to obtain the mother set of the research target. Is it?
I don't think they are doing something similar to the so-called (search) that examiners at the Japanese Patent Office do.
The (search) conducted by examiners at the Japanese Patent Office is a trivialized and distorted version of the correct "prior art search."
（ハッシュタグ）
#INPIT #JPlatPat #note #生成AI #OpenAI #Claude #深層学習 #仕事 #ディープラーニング #ビジネス #ビジネススキル #ビジネスモデル #ビジネスチャンス #知財 #知財戦略 #知財塾 #知的財産 #知的財産権 #知的財産高等裁判所 #特許 #特許調査 #特許法 #特許庁 #特許事務所 #特許分類 #特許検索 #特許分析 #特許情報 #特許権者 #特許無効審判 #専利 #分類付与 #先行技術調査 #無効資料調査 #侵害調査 #侵害予防調査 #パテント #発明 #発明塾 #どうする特許庁 #検索論理式 #審査官 #審判官 #AI #AIの活かし方 #AI画像生成 #IT #ITエンジニア #IT業界 #IT企業 #ITベンチャー #IT化 #IT系 #ITリテラシー #ITツール #DX #DX化 #DX推進 #DX人材 #DX事例 #DXリテラシー #Patent #ChatGPT #GPT #チャットGPT #ChatGPT4 #Gemini #Threads #bing #bingAI #VertexAI #一月万冊 #裁判所 #出願情報 #東京地方裁判所 #特許・情報フェア＆コンファレンス #東京ビッグサイト #IPランドスケープ #JPO #USPTO #KIPO #EPO #知財ソリューション #知的財産戦略 #知財経営戦略 #知財情報 #知財業務 #知財活動 #知財部 #知財実務 #知財実務者 #知財担当者 #知財サービス #知財業界