The Panelists パネリスト
Makiko Takabe, Chief Judge, IP High Court
Makoto Hattori, Attorney at Law, Abe, Ikubo & Katayama
Kyuhong LEE, Presiding Judge, Patent Court of Korea
Sang-Wook HAN, Attorney at Law, Kim & Chang
Wang yuanyuan, Senior Judge, Shenzhen Intellectual Property
Court of Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court

Chixue WEI, Attorney at Law, Linda Liu & Partners
John Nicholas, Justice, Federal Court of Australia
Sarah Matheson, Attorney at Law, Allens
Prathiba M. Singh, Justice, High Court of Delhi
Pravin Anand, Attorney at Law, Anand & AnandModerators: Harumi Kojo and Sumiko Sekine

The Outcome of the Mock Trials 模擬裁判の結果
Element/Conclusion
構成要件/結論

Japan
日本

Korea
韓国

China
中国

オーストラリア

India
インド“Car navigation system”「カーナビゲーションシステム」

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

“First memory means”「第１記憶手段」

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

“Second memory means”「第２記憶手段」

✔

✘

✔

✘

✔

Infringement
侵害No
infringement
非侵害

Infringement
侵害No
infringement
非侵害

Infringement
侵害

Literal infringement
文言侵害

Doctrine of equivalents
均等侵害✔ element satisfied 充足

No DOE
均等侵害なしAustralia

N/A
均等論なし
✘ element unsatisfied 非充足Topics for Discussion トピック
Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

Consideration of the Prosecution History
出願経過の参酌

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

1. Does the court always consider the specification?
明細書を常に参酌するか

2. Construction of the “first memory means” and the“second memory means”「第１記憶手段」，「第２記憶手段」の解釈

WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

1. Does the court always consider the specification?
明細書を常に参酌するか

2. Construction of the “first memory means” andthe “second memory means”「第１記憶手段」，「第２記憶手段」の解釈

WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

1. Does the court always consider the specification?
明細書を常に参酌するか

2. Construction of the “first memory means” and the“second memory means”「第１記憶手段」，「第２記憶手段」の解釈

WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

1. Does the court always consider the specification?
明細書を常に参酌するか

2. What is “Purposive Construction”?
目的的解釈とは何か

3. Construction of the “first memory means” andthe “second memory means”「第１記憶手段」，「第２記憶手段」の解釈
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Claim Terms and the Specification
クレーム文言と明細書の参酌

1. Does the court always consider the specification?
明細書を常に参酌するか

2. What is “Purposive Construction”?
目的的解釈とは何か

3. Construction of the “first memory means” andthe “second memory means”「第１記憶手段」，「第２記憶手段」の解釈
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Consideration of the Prosecution History
出願経過の参酌

Australia
オーストラリアIndia
インド

China
中国

Korea
韓国

Japan
日本

Prosecution
history is notconsidered

Prosecution history estoppel may be applied

出願経過は参酌されない

出願経過禁反言が認められる場合がある

No country considered the Written Opinion in
the mock trial
模擬裁判で本件意見書を参酌した国はなし

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定
general

1. To what extent does the plaintiff need to describe
the features at the time of filing a lawsuit?
提訴時までにどの程度詳細に特定する必要があるか

2. What can the plaintiff do when it is difficult todescribe the features?
詳細な特定が困難な場合に取り得る手段

3. How to gather information before filing a lawsuit
提訴前における情報収集手段
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定

1. Difficulties the plaintiff might face in fully
specifying the accused product/method at thetime of filing a lawsuit
原告が提訴時までに詳細に特定することの困難

2. What can the plaintiff do when it is difficult todescribe the features?
詳細な特定が困難な場合に取り得る手段

3. How to gather information before filing a lawsuit
提訴前における情報収集手段
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定

1. To what extent does the plaintiff need to describe
the features at the time of filing a lawsuit?
提訴時までにどの程度詳細に特定する必要があるか

2. What happens when the defendant contends thefeatures are not fully specified?
特定不十分であると争われた場合の対応

3. How ｔo gather information before filing a lawsuit
提訴前における情報収集手段
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定

1. To what extent does the plaintiff need to describe
the features at the time of filing a lawsuit?
提訴時までにどの程度詳細に特定する必要があるか

2. What can the plaintiff do when it is difficult todescribe the features?
詳細な特定が困難な場合に取り得る手段

3. How to gather information before filing a lawsuit
提訴前における情報収集手段
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定

1. To what extent does the plaintiff need to describe
the features at the time of filing a lawsuit?
提訴時までにどの程度詳細に特定する必要があるか

2. What can the plaintiff do when it is difficult todescribe the features?
詳細な特定が困難な場合に取り得る手段

3. How to gather information before filing a lawsuit
提訴前における情報収集手段
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Specifying the Features of Accused Product/Method
被告製品/方法の特定
1. Why is the onus to prove the accused method

shifted to the defendant in Section 104 A of Indian
Patent Act?
インド特許法１０４条Aによる被疑侵害方法についての立証責任の転換

2. To what extent does the plaintiff need to describe
the features at the time of filing a lawsuit?
提訴時までにどの程度詳細に特定する必要があるか
WRAP UP PANEL DISCUSSION

2

Thank you!