【PATENT ★】”VIRUS” Patent Infringement Case: A case in which the Tokyo District Court found to the effect that experiments or research conducted to obtain marketing approval for a new (original) medicinal product also correspond to the “working of the patented invention for experimental or research purposes” set forth in Article 69, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Act. The right of a prior user was acknowledged.
―Tokyo District Court Case No. 2019 (Wa) 1409 of July 22, 2020 (Presiding Judge SATO)
(1) Article 69, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Act
It is provided that: “A patent right is not effective against the working of the patented invention for experimental or research purposes.”
(2) The Supreme Court Decision of April 16,1999 (Case No. 1999 [Ju] 153)
Experiments or research conducted to obtain marketing approval for a “generic” medicine correspond to the “working of the patented invention for experimental or research purposes” set forth in Article 69, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Act.”
(An excerpt from the judgment)
(3) The decision of the present case
Experiments or research conducted to obtain marketing approval for a “new (original)” medicine also correspond to the “working of the patented invention for experimental or research purposes” set forth in Article 69, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Act.”
(An excerpt from the judgment)
(4) A case in which the court rendered a decision to the same effect as the present court decision
Tokyo District Court Decision of February 9, 1998 (Case No. 1996 [Wa] 8627; Presiding Judge TAKABE)
Writer: Hideki TAKAISHI
Supervising editor: Kazuhiko YOSHIDA
Contact for inquiries: h_takaishi@nakapat.gr.jp
Hideki TAKAISHI
Attorney at Law & Patent Attorney
Nakamura & Partners
Room No. 616, Shin-Tokyo Building,
3-3-1 Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100-8355, JAPAN

