The Physical-Object Invention and the Material Invention<br/>—Efficient Use of a Categorization Based on Looks (Appearance and Property)
- 1 Kageyama International Law & Patent Firm, Tokyo, Japan
Abstract
As the way of the categorization of inventions from their appearances and properties, the physical-object invention focuses on the shape and structure of articles, and the material invention focuses on the property and its transformation of articles (the Opinion 1). The author has hitherto proposed the above categorization. In this paper, the ground of the introduction and reasonableness of introducing this categorization into the patent system will be explained in more detail. In addition, the property and its transformation in the material invention and the technical systematization of the contents of the definition of the physical-object/material inventions will be analyzed. The relation of an article and material can be represented by the words “An article comprises materials.” The flow of technical development and formation of inventions will be also explained. The issues, which should be revised, relating to the existing patent examination guidelines and the interpretation of the theory of dividing invention into elements, will be analyzed, using the categorization of physical-object/material inventions. The reason why the PBP Claim can be applied only in the case of material inventions (only in the part of them) will be also shown. On the contrary, the reason why the relation to use other persons patent invention can be applied only in the case of physical-object inventions will be also explained. In this regard, the discussion will be made combining together the author’s another opinion (the Opinion 2) placing the high value on the principle in the analysis of the formation process of inventions, especially in the case by means of experiments, also. Furthermore, the possibility of introducing the categorization of physical-object/material inventions in the way of making inventions will be discussed.
- Kageyama, K. (2010). Formation of Invention/Joint Invention and Recognition of Inventor/Joint Inventor. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (Oxford Journals), 5, 699-712. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpq097
- Kageyama, K. (2012). The Practice of Recognizing an Inventor/Joint Inventors and Calculation of Contribution Ratios among Joint Inventors. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (Oxford Journals), 7, 590-603. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jps090
- Kageyama, K. (2014). Necessity, Criteria (Requirements or Limits) and Acknowledgement of Product Identity of Claims for Product Described by Its Manufacturing Process (Product-by-Process Claims). Beijing Law Review, 5. https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2014.52011
- Kageyama, K. (2015). Recognition of Inventor/Joint Inventors and Product-by-Process Claims. Berlin: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
- Kageyama, K. (2016a). Determining Inventive Step or Nonobviousness for a Patent Requirement in View of the Formation Process of an Invention. Beijing Law Review, 7. https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2016.73023
- Kageyama, K. (2016b). Study of Technical Scope including Doctrine of Equivalent and Patent Infringement Litigation. International Journal of Case Studies, 5. http://www.casestudiesjournal.com/volume-5-issue-11/
- Mann, D. (2002). Hands-On Systematic Innovation. Belgium: CREAX Press (Present Publisher (2014) UK: IFR Press).
- Nisshin-Seifun & Tokkyo-chōChōkan (2001). Chiteki Zaisan Saibanreishū, Japanese Supreme Court Website. http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/search7
- Takahashi, J. (2014). Shokumu-hatsumei-kitei Henkō-oyobi Sōtō-rieki-santei-no Hōritsu-jitsumu. Tokyo: Keizai Sangyō Chōsa-kai.
- TejimaKikuo, & Pfizer Seiyaku, K. K. (1810). HanreiJihō 102; 1117 Hanrei Times 280. (Tokyo District Ct., Aug. 27, 2002).
- TevaJojiserujāruzātokeruenmukedorēsubenyutārushashāgu v. Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd. (2015). HanreiJiho 113; 1417 Hanrei Times 75. (Japanese Supreme Court, Jun. 5, 2015).
- Woodford, C. (2017). How Do Airplanes Fly? Airplanes. http://www.explainthatstuff.com/howplaneswork.html
- X v. JSR K. K. (1985). HanreiJiho 106; 1234 Hanrei Times 182 (Tokyo District Ct., Sept. 12, 2006).
- X v. K. K. Tōshiba (2008). Chiteki Zaisan Saibanreishū. Japanese Supreme Court Website. http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/search7