|
 |
|
 |
IP News Flash |
|
Keisen’s Policy
on the IDS System in Japan
The
Japan Patent Office (JPO) has
implemented an information
disclosure system whereby applicants
have a duty to disclose prior art
that they know of at the time of
filing a patent application.
However, the requirement is not
widely recognized so that many
applicants do not follow it. This is
because negligence of the duty to
disclose prior art in practice has
no effect on the validity of the
patent, unlike the Information
Disclosure Statement (IDS) in the USPTO.
This sort of strategy,
however, may come back to
haunt you, particularly if the subject Japanese patent is involved in a
U.S. licensing arbitration. One
possibility is that the arbiter may
find the patentee’s behavior less than equitable, and determine the
patent unenforceable on moral and ethical grounds. There may be other
pitfalls. Whatever the case may
be, the important thing is to guard oneself against potential problems.
We therefore highly recommend that everyone involved in the
preparation of the application comply fully with the disclosure system.
The details of the requirements are as follows:
I. Information
Disclosure System in Japan
A. Overview
-
The prior art
information disclosure system was
introduced in September 2002.
-
All patent
applications filed after September
2002 are required to disclose the
prior art information.
-
However, the effect
of a violation is so minimal that an
application once patented will not
become invalidated.
B.
The IDS requirement applies to the
following applications:
-
All Japanese domestic
applications and all international
applications filed after September
1, 2002.
-
In case of a PCT
application entering into the
Japanese national phase, an IDS
system is required only for
applications whose international
filing date falls after September 1,
2002.
-
In case of a
divisional application, an IDS
system is required if the parent
application was filed after
September 1, 2002.
C.
Methods for the information
disclosure
-
At least one
publication should be listed in
"Background" section of a patent
specification.
-
Only publication or
literature is acceptable, including
electronically formatted Web
documents available online.
-
If an applicant has a
number of prior arts, an applicant
can disclose only the major ones
that are most relevant.
-
If a prior art is a
patent publication, the following
information has to be provided: its
application number, publication
number or patent number.
-
For a non-patent
publication, including a
dissertation, a thesis or any kind
of electronically formatted
non-patent document, the following
information is required: the name of
the document, name of the
organization published, publisher,
date of presentation, published
date, volume, number, cited page
number(s), and/or URL address and
online published date.
-
An applicant does not
have to submit the original or
duplicate copies of publications.
However, depending on the case, the
examiner sometimes asks for the
documents for examination purposes.
Only in this case, an applicant is
required to submit copies of
publications about prior arts.
-
If there are no prior
arts to disclose, an applicant must
state the reason in the patent
specification.
D.
Effects of Disclosure
-
If a specification
does not include any information on
prior arts nor a reason for not
including the prior arts, an
official action will be issued from
the JPO. Upon receiving the
official action, the applicant can
file an amendment according to the
examiner's request.
-
Failure in disclosure
could result in the rejection by
examiners but will not invalidate
the patent after issued. In other
words, negligence of the duty has no
effect on the validity of the patent
right.
-
Therefore, even if
the fact that a patentee, who had
known the availability of the prior
arts relevant to the invention in
question, did not disclose the prior
art information is discovered after
a patent is obtained, there is no
legal effect on the issued patent.
-
However, a patentee
knowingly neglecting to follow this
system may face indirect
disadvantages when attempting to
enforce his/her rights.
The details of the JPO’s new guidelines are also available in English
on the JPO’s
website.
Finally, we would like to request that you create a list of
references/documents and provide that to us along with your instructions to file a Request for
Examination.
|
|
|
|