○ Procedure thereafter
Date for Settlement
Sep. 27, 2021

Consultation for Settlement

Termination of procedure forSettlement
25

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２
3rd Date for Oral Argument
October 20, 2021

-Rendering of Judgement-

2021/10/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～3RD DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT -26

Rendering of Judgement
 Main Text
1.

The defendant shall not manufacture or sell the Defendant’sStyluses.

2.

The remaining parts of the plaintiff’s demand are dismissed withprejudice on the merits.

3.

The court costs shall be divided into two equal parts, with thedefendant to bear one half and the plaintiff to bear the other half.

4.

This judgment may be provisionally enforced as far as paragraph 1 isconcerned.

2021/10/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～ 3RD DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT-27

Summary of the reason(Presence/absence of Indirect Infringement as to stylus)
 Using by attaching the Defendant’s Stylus to the internal contact type position
detector has the effect of preventing deterioration of positon detection
accuracy due to wear or deformation of the contacting portion. Therefore, it
shall not to be determined that the use in such a way is not economical,
commercial or practical application.

Usable by equipment with the internal
contact type position detector !!!

Defendant’sStylusInternal contact typeposition detector＋
another type of stylus

manufactureInternal contact typeposition detector ＋
Defendant’s Stylus

Not fall under Patent
Act 101 (i)sale2021/10/20

replace by Defendant’s Stylus

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～ 3RD DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT -28

Summary of the reason（ Presence/absence of Indirect Infringement as to stylus ） The Defendant’s Stylus is a specially designed product compatible exclusivelywith the position detector manufactured by the defendant. Therefore, theDefendant’s Stylus does not fall under “those widely distributed withinJapan.” The Defendant’s Stylus falls under a product “indispensable for the resolutionof the problem by the Present Invention.
 The defendant was notified by the plaintiff and is found to have becomeaware that it is highly probable that the Defendant’s Stylus is used for theworking of the Present Invention.
Defendant’s Stylus
Fall under Patent Act
101 (ii)

2021/10/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～ 3RD DATE FOR ORAL JYDGMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT-29

Summary of the reason(Presence/absence of Indirect Infringement as to positiondetector (Form α)) The Present Invention adopts “the structure that, in an energized typeposition detector, a contacting portion of the stylus is made of a nonmagnetic material containing tungsten carbide and a nickel binder”.
On the other hand, the main body of the Defendant’s Position
Detector is an independent component that differs from theDefendant’s Stylus adopting the structure described above. Therefore,
the main body shall not be an article “indispensable for the resolutionof the problem” by the Present Invention.
Defendant’s Position
Detector (Formα)
Not fall under Patent
Act 101 (ii)2021/10/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～ 3RD DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT -30

Summary of the reason(Necessity of injunction)
 Present circumstances show it is highly probable that acts
such as assigning the Defendant’s Styluses may induce
infringement of the Plaintiff’s Patent Right. In light of thisfact, the necessity of injunction against the manufactureand sale of the Defendant’s Styluses shall be recognized
for the purpose of stopping and preventing infringementof the Plaintiff’s Patent Right.
Defendant’s Stylus

Necessary to injunct themanufacture and sale

2021/10/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ ２ ～ 3RD DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT – RENDERING OF JUDGMENT-31

Thank you32