Mock Trial ＳＣＥＮＥ １
2nd Date for Oral Argument －Explanatory Session

 Procedures thereafter ＳＣＥＮＥ ２

3rd Date for Oral Argument －Rendering ofJudgement

1ＳＣＥＮＥ １

2nd Date for
Oral Argument
Sep. 20, 2021－Explanatory Session－
20/9/2021

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －2

○ Procedures to be conducted on this dateStatement of the Outcomeof Preparatory Proceedings

Confirmation of the clarified
issues in dispute

Explanatory Session

Final presentation forsummarizing and orally
explaining allegations of bothpartiesParticipation of TechnicalAdvisors

Explanation on the specialized,technical matters in dispute

20/9/2021

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －3

Confirmation of the clarified issues indispute (1) Whether or not the manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Styluses by
the defendant constitute indirect infringement

Defendant’sStyluses

I.

Exclusive use type of indirect infringement （Patent Act 101(i)）

II.

Multi-use but indispensable type of indirect infringement （Parent Act 101(ii)）

 Whether or not the manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Position

Detectors 【Form α】 by the defendant constitute indirect infringement
Multi-use but indispensable type of indirect
infringement （Parent Act 101(ii)）

Defendant’s Position
Detector 【Form α】

Defendant’s Position
Detector 【Form β】

 Necessity of injunction

does not fall within
the technical scope

falls within thetechnical scopeStandard Stylus
20/9/2021

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －Defendant’sStylus
4Confirmation of the clarified issues indispute (2)Plaintiff’s allegation⇒manufacture and sale of Defendant’s Styluses ＝indirect infringement

DonkeyUser

IndirectInfringementPatent Act 101(i),(ii)Defendant’sStyluses

Defendant’s Position Detector(Form α)Defendant’s Position Detector(Form β)（D-Pointer［energized type］＋Standard Stylus）（ D-Pointer ［energized type］＋Defendant’s Stylus）

manufacturesale

20/9/2021

Replace by Defendant’s Stylus

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －5

Confirmation of the clarified issues in dispute (3)Plaintiff’s allegation ⇒ manufacture and sale of Defendant’s Position Detectors (Form α）＝ indirect infringement

DonkeyUserIndirectInfringement
Patent Act 101(ⅱ)
Defendant’s Position Detector(Form α）
（D-Pointer［energized type］＋Standard Stylus）

Defendant’s Position Detector(Form β）
（D-Pointer［energized type］＋ Defendant’s Stylus）

Defendant’sStylus

manufacturesale

2021/9/20

replace by Defendant’s Stylus

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －6

Confirmation of the clarified issues in dispute (4)Defendant’s allegation ⇒ Defendant’s Stylus, Defendant’s Position Detector (Form α)＝
Not constitute indirect infringementDonkey
Not fall under
Patent Act 101(ⅰ),
(ⅱ)

User
the manufacture and sale of theDefendant’s Position Detectors (Form α）
do not fall under Patent Act 101(ⅱ)

Internal contact type position
detector＋ another type ofstylus

Defendant’sStylusInternal contact type position
detector ＋ Defendant’sStylus

manufacturesale

2021/9/20

replace by Defendant’s Stylus

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －7

１．Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Plaintiff’s allegations ①: Patent Act, Article 101 (1))

Main body

Energizing contact
is disconnected

Stylus:Not energized ⇒An electricallynon-conductive
material may beused

2021/8/20

Measurement
method andperformancedifferWorkpiece:
An electricallynon-conductive
material can bedetected

Detects
the contact

MainbodyStylus:
Energized ⇒An electricallyconductive
material isessential

Current flow

Current flow

Internal contact type

Energized type（less accurate
measurement）（better measurementaccuracy）

Workpiece:
Only anelectricallyconductive
material canbe detected8

1. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Plaintiff’s allegations ①: Patent Act, Article 101 (1))
Present invention and measurement method

The present invention has adopted a configuration where a contacting portion is made from
cemented carbide, which is a non-magnetic material. This is to prevent measurement errors andother problems, which are caused by choosing an “energized type”, for the stylus becomes
magnetized over the course of being repeatedly energized.
Economical, commercial and practical application
When adopting an internal contact type, users would not use the Defendant’s Stylus, which has acontacting portion made from costly non-magnetic, cemented carbide, for the problem that thestylus becoming magnetized by being repeatedly energized does not arise. (Contacting portionsmade of hard material are common. In using an internal contact type, the users would use astylus having a contact portion made from economical material).
Using the Defendant’s Stylus with an internal contact type position detector is not an economical,
commercial or practical application.
Conclusion
The manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Stylus constitutes indirect infringement of a
dedicated product type.
2021/8/20

91. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Plaintiff’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2), (i))
“indispensable for the resolution of the problem”

The problem to be solved by the Present Invention: the prevention ofmeasurement errors arising in a positon detector that adopts the energized typemeasuring method, due to the stylus becoming magnetic or arising from thewear and deformation of the stylus caused by repeated contact and separation
between the stylus and workpieces. (Specification of the Present Patent [006][009])
As means to solve this problem, the Present Invention adopts a structure“made of a non-magnetic material containing tungsten carbide and a nickelbinder” in Feature B.
The Defendant’s Stylus, containing non-magnetic material A, which has thematerial stipulated in Feature B, should be considered as being “indispensablefor the resolution of the problem”.
2021/8/20

101. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Plaintiff’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2), (ii))
Defendant’s subjective
The Defendant’s Stylus is used with the Defendant’s Position Detector, and the users
who purchase the Defendant’s Stylus attach it to the Defendant’s Position Detector.
Although recognizing the users’ manner of use and receiving the Demand Letter, theDefendant continues to manufacture and sell the Defendant’s Stylus. The Defendantis aware that “this invention is a patented invention” and the Defendant’s Stylus is“used for the working of the invention.”DonkeyUser
α FormDefendant’sStylus

Defendant’sStylus

β Form
(D pointer +Defendant’sStylus)

Salereplace
2021/8/20

11

1. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Plaintiff’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2), (ii))
“a product widely distributed within Japan”
The Stylus manufactured by the Defendant is a “custom-made product”,
which can only be attached to the position detector manufactured by theDefendant.

Conclusion
Manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Stylus constitutes indirect
infringement of a non-dedicated product type.

2021/8/20

121. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Defendant’s allegations ①: Patent Act, Article 101 (1))
 Economical, commercial and practical application
 The Defendant’s Stylus is compatible with the internal contact type position

detector manufactured by the defendantDonkey

User
Internal contact type position
detector＋another type ofstylus

The
Defendant’sStylusSale2021/8/20

Usable by equipment withthe internal contact typeposition detector !!!
Internal contact type position
detector＋the Defendant’s
StylusReplacement
to the Defendant’s Stylus

131. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Defendant’s allegations ①: Patent Act, Article 101 (1))
 The cemented carbide as raw material of the Defendant’s stylus has
excellent abrasion resistance and corrosion resistance. There is anecessity to use a stylus made of cemented carbide even in theinternal contact type position detector because it has the advantage ofpreventing measurement errors resulting from wear and deformation
caused by repeated contact with a workpiece that is very hard.
 The Defendant’s Stylus has an economical, commercial or practicaluse application as a stylus for an internal contact type position
detector
 The Defendant’s stylus does not fall under a “product to be used
exclusively for the producing of” the Defendant’s Position Detector(item (i), Article 101 of the Patent Act)

2021/8/20

14

1. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Defendant’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2))
“a product widely distributed within Japan”

 Ｔhe Defendant’s Stylus is a standard product and a popular product“widely distributed within Japan” (quotation from item (ii), Article
101 of the Patent Act).
↓【Reasons】
 A stylus is a tool with a tip that comes into contact with an object, andhas been widely used by attaching it to a position detector in the fieldof detecting the position of an object.
 Like any other styluses, the Defendant’s Stylus is not different fromthe conventional ones in that it is a product that is attached to aposition detector and has the function of contacting an object for
position detection.
2021/8/20

15

1. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Defendant’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2))
 Defendant’s subjective

 It cannot be said that the defendant manufactured and sold the Defendant’s
Styluses knowing that they were “used for the working of the invention.” The defendant is selling the Defendant’s Position Detectors, with the SUS
styluses (the Standard Styluses) attached as the standard equipment to theDefendant’s Position Detectors.
【Form α】
（D-Pointer ＋theStandard Stylus）

2021/8/20

The Defendant does notsell the Defendant’s
Stylus in a way that itattaches to theDefendant’s Position
Detectors!!!

16

1. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of stylus(Defendant’s allegations ②: Patent Act, Article 101 (2))

 The defendant does not know exactly in how
many cases, or to what extent, the Defendant’s
Styluses are attached to and used with theDefendant’s Position Detectors.
 The Defendant does not sell the Defendant’sStyluses “knowing” that they were used for theworking of the invention.

2021/8/20

17

２．Presence/absence of indirect infringement ofposition detector (Plaintiff’s allegations)“indispensable for the resolution of the problem”

To solve the problem by the Present Invention, both adopting theenergized type measurement method of the position detector and making
the stylus of a non-magnetic material are indispensable.
In Form β, the Defendant’s Position Detector, which is a part of theenergized type measurement method, is also an article that is“indispensable for the resolution of the problem” by the Present Invention.

2021/8/20

18

2. Presence/absence of indirect infringement of position
detector (Plaintiff’s allegations)Defendant’s subjective
The Defendant’s Stylus is sold as “a replacement stylus” for the Defendant’s Position
Detector. The Defendant manufactures and sells the Defendant’s Position Detector
being aware that the said position detector is used in Form β, in other words, “usedfor the working of the invention”.

DonkeyForm α (DPointer +StandardStylus)

Conclusion

Form αDefendant’sStylus↓
Stylus forreplacement

User
Defendant’sStylus

Form β (D Pointer +Defendant’s Stylus)

Salereplace

The manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Position Detector constitutes indirect
infringement of a non-dedicated product type.
2021/8/20

19

3. Necessity of injunction（Plaintiff’s allegations）
Necessity of injunction
The Defendant started selling the Defendant’s Stylus and Position
Detector at the same time long after the registration of the patent, and still
continues indirect infringement even after receiving a warning from thePlaintiff.
Injunction against the Defendant’s manufacture and sale is necessary inorder to stop and prevent infringement of the Plaintiff’s Patent Right.

2006.4.16 2008.1.26
File Patent Patentapplication granted

2021/8/20

2020.4.1

2020.5.1 2020.8.17

Defendant: starts manufacturing Warning File suitand selling the Defendant’sPosition Detector/ Stylus

Ongoing indirect
infringement bythe Defendant20

2．Presence/absence of indirect infringement of position
detector(Defendant’s allegations)“indispensable for the resolution of the problem”
The Defendant’s Position Detector is not an article “indispensable forthe resolution of the problem” by the Present Invention (item (ii), Article
101 of the Patent Act).
【Reasons】
 The Defendant’s Position Detectors themselves do not prevent
measurement error caused due to the stylus wear, deformation, ormagnetization caused by repeated contact with and separation fromworkpieces and the like.
 The characteristic component that directly brings about the uniquestructure that characterizes the characteristic technical means of thePresent Invention is the Defendant’s Stylus, and not the Defendant’sPosition Detectors.

2021/8/2021

3. Necessity of injunction（ Defendant’s allegations）
 (If, indirect infringement is found) Plaintiff’s demand for injunction against the manufacture andsale of the Defendant’s Styluses and the Defendant’s Position Detectors should not be granted.

 There is the legitimate use that the Defendant’s Styluses are attached to internal contact typeposition detectors

LegitimateUse!!!

UserDonkey
TheDefendant’sStylusInternal contact type position
detector＋another type ofstylus

SaleInternal contact type position
detector＋the Defendant’sStylus

Replacement
to the Defendant’s Stylus

There is no reason to restrict the manufacture and sale of the Defendant’s Position Detectors thatmerely have a publicly-known structure.

2021/8/20

22

○ Q and A Session

 Question 1－ Using the Defendant’s Stylus for
an internal contact type position detector

2021/9/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －23

○ Q and A Session

 Question 1－ Using the Defendant’s Stylus for
an internal contact type position detector
 Question 2－ Relationship between an
energized type position detector anddemagnetization of a stylus
2021/9/20

ＳＣＥＮＥ １ ～ 2ND DATE FOR ORAL ARGUMENT － EXPLANATORY SESSION －24