kipb-jp

The 2026 JPO Status Report: Japan as a Premier Destination for Strategic IP Filing

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 10:56:06 GMT

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) has recently released its 2026 Status Report , providing a comprehensive overview of current IP statistics, trends, and policy developments in Japan. The report once again confirms Japan's important position in the global IP landscape and as one of the world’s most efficient, reliable, and user-friendly IP jurisdictions for foreign rights holders.

Some of the standout highlights in the report are discussed below:

1. Examination Pendency: Still the Fastest in the IP5

2. The Hague System: Moving on up

3. Appeals: High Success Rates for Applicants

4. Modernised Examination

Japan’s examination system for patents, trademarks, and designs is increasingly geared towards speed, quality, and user-friendly business relevance. Key recent improvements discussed in the report include:

Collaborative Examination: The Collective Examination for IP Portfolio Supporting Business Strategy (CEIP) enables coordinated examination of patents, trademarks, and designs by teams of examiners, supporting the broader IP portfolios of modern multinational businesses.
Improved Communication: The JPO offers flexible online and on-site interviews, making examiner discussions more accessible for overseas applicants.
Temporary Suspension of Examination: A recent reform also allows applicants to temporarily suspend examination of divisional applications while a parent application is under appeal. This provides valuable flexibility to adapt claim strategies based on the outcome of the appeal - which many of our international clients have benefited from.

The KIPB take:

The 2026 report further demonstrates the JPO’s commitment to a user-friendly system and high levels of applicant satisfaction. With reported user satisfaction exceeding 95% , Japan should be part of any global IP strategy.

Please feel free to contact us at KIPB to discuss how these developments may benefit your IP portfolio.

Make the Switch to KIPB

We offer discounted services for many first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their Japanese IP matters to our firm.

Meet with KIPB at INTA 2026 in London

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 07:42:18 GMT

London calling to the faraway towns…

Masa and I will be heading to London for the INTA Annual Meeting 2026 from 2–6 May, representing KIPB Japan and looking forward to a good week of catching up and making new connections.

So if you fancy a natter over a cup of tea, coffee — or possibly something a little stronger — please do get in touch. It’s always a pleasure to reconnect, and equally good to make new acquaintances.

If we’ve not met before, KIPB is a Japanese boutique IP firm working with overseas firms on Japanese patents, trade marks, and designs, with a focus on clear, actionable advice and quick communication when things are shifting fast.

I’m originally from the UK and work as an IP consultant for our international clients. Masa heads our trade mark and design practice.

�� Central London ( Covent Garden / Liverpool Street station )
�� Flexible during the week

See you in London!

#INTA2026 #INTA #JapanIP #Trademarks #Patents #London #KIPB

Make the Switch to KIPB

We offer discounted services for many first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their Japanese IP matters to our firm.

KIPB at APAA 2025 in KL

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 09:19:25 GMT

APAA 2025 in Kuala Lumpur was a truly memorable few days, and Yoshi and Steve were delighted to meet many new friends and reconnect with colleagues and long-standing partners from across the Asia-Pacific, Europe and the US.

What stood out most this year was the atmosphere — warm, relaxed, and full of genuine conversation. The hospitality of our Malaysian hosts, and the laughter shared late into the evenings all made this APAA one to remember.

Thank you again to everyone who took the time to meet with us — whether for a scheduled meeting, on one of the interesting excursions (whether long or short!) or a quick hallway chat or catch-up. We truly appreciate the warm invitations and the meaningful conversations.

We look forward to seeing many of you again. In the meantime, our team remains ready to support you with all your patent, design, and trademark needs in Japan.

See you at APAA 2026!

Make the Switch

We offer discounted services for many first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their Japanese IP matters to our firm.

KIPB Japan at APAA 2025 – Kuala Lumpur, November 6–10

Fri, 17 Oct 2025 07:21:51 GMT

The Asian Patent Attorneys Association ( APAA ) will hold its General Assembly and Council Meetings in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from November 6 to 10, 2025. Representatives from IP law firms across Asia and around the world will be in attendance, and KIPB Japan is delighted to be part of this year’s event.

We will be represented by Steve Denney , leading our international client accounts and business development, and Yoshiaki Kishizawa , Head of our Patent Department.

We’re very much looking forward to catching up with colleagues and friends, making new connections, and discussing the latest developments in intellectual property in Japan. If you’d like to arrange a meeting during the conference, please feel free to contact us in advance or reach out directly at the event (our details are on the registered list of attendees).

�� Tokyo Office: +81-3-6433-7507

�� Steve’s mobile/WhatsApp: +81-(0)80-3514-2686

✉️ Email: mail@kipb.net

For further details about the conference, please visit the official APAA 2025 site.

We look forward to seeing everyone in Kuala Lumpur!

KIPB - Make the switch

We offer discounted services for many first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their Japanese IP matters to our firm.

KIPB at INTA 2025 in San Diego

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Thu, 05 Jun 2025 09:52:22 GMT

Masa and I thoroughly enjoyed attending INTA 2025 in San Diego , reconnecting with friends and colleagues from around the world.

One of the true highlights was the cocktail reception and guided tour aboard the historic USS Midway , led by U.S. Navy veterans — an inspiring and memorable experience. Thank you for your service, guys. The disco-dancing finale in the Gaslamp Quarter was also a fantastic way to wrap up what we’ll all remember as a vintage INTA event!

Our time in San Diego was filled with great conversations, shared stories, and valuable insights. W e’re grateful for all the generous invitations and the chance to deepen relationships and explore future collaborations.

We also like to think that KIPB Japan made our growing presence felt — not as just another Japanese IP firm, but as a trusted go-to for all IP matters in Japan, del ivered with clarity, speed, and reliability.

We look forward to seeing many of you again at INTA 2026 in London !

Make the switch

We offer discounted services for many first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their Japanese IP matters to our firm.

Meet KIPB Japan at INTA 2025 in sunny San Diego!

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Thu, 03 Apr 2025 09:18:52 GMT

The INTA Annual Meeting is back, this year in sunny San Diego from May 17 to 21, 2025! With over 8,500 trademark professionals from more than 125 countries, it’s shaping up to be another fantastic event.

KIPB will be there, represented by Masahito Shibata (our trademarks head) and Steve Denney (International clients & BD).

We’d love to catch up with old friends, make new connections, and chat about the latest on IP in Japan—or just swap stories over coffee (or something stronger!). If you’d like to meet up, email us or go to our LinkedIn page . Or contact us at the conference (our details are on the registered list of attendees) or at +81-(0)80-3514-2686 (Steve's mobile/WhatsApp)

For further information about the event, please visit the official conference site here .

Looking forward to seeing everyone there!

KIPB Japan — Make the switch

We offer discounted services for first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their IP matters to our firm.

Finding the Best IP Law Firm in Japan for International Corporations, Startups, and SMEs

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Thu, 13 Feb 2025 10:56:56 GMT

Why Japan is a Critical Market for IP Protection

Choosing the Right IP Firm in Japan

The right IP firm makes all the difference. A firm with a proven track record with international clients ensures your IP rights are secured efficiently, minimizing risks and maximizing protection.

Whether you’re a multinational corporation, an innovative startup, or a growing SME, your IP firm should offer:

Expertise in articulating Japanese Patent Law & Regulations

Success in Working with Foreign Clients and businesses

Clear & Effective Communication

Cost-Effectiveness & Predictable Pricing

Speed, Precision & Reliability in Prosecution and Enforcement

Strong Local Network & Relationships with JPO

Why KIPB is the Right Partner for You

This is where KIPB stands out. With a strong international reputation and a client-first approach, KIPB delivers all of the above—and more:

✔ Fast, Cost-Effective Protection – KIPB specializes in the swift and efficient prosecution and enforcement of patents and trademarks for global clients, guiding them from PCT, Paris, and trademark filings to registration and ongoing portfolio management.

✔ Precision in Patent Translation & Response – Language nuances can determine a patent’s strength. KIPB’s bilingual attorneys and expert team ensure technically precise, enforceable applications, minimizing costly office actions and maximizing protection.

✔ Strategic, Business-Focused IP Solutions – KIPB goes beyond filings to optimize patent claims and trademark scope, anticipate examiner responses, and ensure your IP portfolio aligns with long-term commercial objectives.

✔ Comprehensive Portfolio Management – From renewals to expansion strategies, KIPB actively manages your IP portfolio, ensuring continuous protection while assisting with opportunities for growth and innovation.

✔ Global Insight, Local Mastery – KIPB bridges global business expectations with Japan’s legal framework, offering seamless navigation of the Japanese IP system while maintaining clear, proactive communication.

✔ Speed & Reliability in Prosecution & Enforcement – With top-tier expertise in Japan’s IP practice, KIPB provides clear guidance, swift action on office actions and disputes, and reliable enforcement strategies to secure your rights.

✔ Transparent, Predictable Pricing – No hidden fees or unnecessary costs. KIPB offers flexible, competitive pricing models that align with the financial needs of corporations, startups, and SMEs.

✔ Dedicated, Client-Centric Partnership – At KIPB, we treat your IP as if it were our own, delivering personalized service and proactive solutions so you can focus on innovation while we safeguard your competitive edge.

With KIPB , you gain more than an IP firm—you gain a strategic partner committed to protecting and maximizing your intellectual property in Japan.

Make the switch

We offer discounted services for first-time clients and seamless onboarding for companies transitioning their IP matters to our firm.

Applicants can now request a resumption of examination of a divisional application that has been suspended during the appeal examination of the parent application.

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Mon, 03 Jun 2024 10:06:16 GMT

In accordance with the rules introduced last year, applicants may request the temporary suspension of the examination of a divisional application until the result of an appeal for the parent application.

This has made it more efficient for examiners to examine divisional applications with reference to the appeal results and enabled applicants to refine their divisional claim strategies based on the outcome of the appeal.

Refer to our previous article on this for more details HERE .

Previously, requesting resumption of examination was not possible

Previously, an examination was suspended for up to three months after any of the following outcomes in the parent appeal, and applicants could not request resumption of the suspended examination or retract the request.

(1) A copy of the Decision of allowance during the pre-appeal re-examination stage of the parent is sent to the applicant.

(2) A copy of the first* appeal Decision (grant or rejection) is sent to the applicant.

(3) The request for appeal is withdrawn or dismissed.

Revised rules

Under the revised rules that came into effect on April 1, 2024, applicants or their representatives in Japan can request a resumption of the suspended examination for the divisional application, provided this is before any of the outcomes (1) to (3) for the parent. If so, the examination will commence in the same time frame as per regular divisional applications. If not, the ‘up to 3 months after (1) to (3)’ rule above continues to apply.

The applicant will need to submit a request for resumption of examination as well as an online application form. KIPB can advise you on this and carry out the procedure for you.

Note that once a request for resumption of examination is accepted, the applicant cannot file another request to suspend the examination.

Advantages of provision to request resumption of examination

The amendment to the temporary suspension of examination rule allows applicants who have decided upon a specific scope of claims for the divisional to have their claims examined in a timely manner and before the outcomes in the appeal stage for the parent.

Happy Japanese Invention Day, everyone!

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:41:55 GMT

April 18th is “Invention Day” in Japan, when we celebrate the history of Japanese innovation and creativity that has made the nation one of the world's leading players in the global patent industry.

Restriction on multi-multi claims

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:55:14 GMT

As discussed in a previous article HERE , the JPO no longer allows multi-multi claims in Japanese patent or utility model applications with filing dates (or international filing dates in the case of PCT applications entering Japan) on or after April 1, 2022.

Since this rule came in over a year ago, we are starting to see some applications that still contain these impermissible claim formats at the filing or examination stages. Given that any multi-multi claims found at examination will be rejected and subsequent amendments restricted, we shall advise clients on this more clearly for the foreseeable future.

What is a multi-multi claim?

“Multi-multi claims” are officially defined as “any dependent claim that refers to more than one other claim in the alternative (“multiple dependent claim”) which depends from any other multiple dependent claims.”

The JPO provides this example claim set to illustrate:

[Claim 1] A ball bearing with a specific structure.

[Claim 2] A ball bearing according to claim 1, wherein the inner ring is stainless steel.

[Claim 3] A ball bearing according to claim 1 or 2 , wherein the outer ring is stainless steel.

[Claim 4] A ball bearing as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 3 , wherein an annular buffer is provided on the outside of the outer ring.

[Claim 5] A ball bearing according to claim 4 , wherein the annular buffer is rubber.

Thus, in this case, claim 4 is a multi-multi claim since it is a multiple-dependent claim depending from another multiple-dependent claim (i.e. claim 3). Claim 5 is also classed as a multi-multi claim since it is a dependent claim depending from a multi-multi claim (i.e. claim 4).

Examination of multi-multi claims (and disadvantages to the scope of allowed claims)

If an examiner finds mutli-multi claims in a patent application during examination, they will issue a rejection without examining the claims for other patent requirements such as novelty, inventive step, etc.*

If, in response to such a rejection, the applicant amends the multi-multi claims so they are in proper format (i.e. they are no longer in multi-multi-claim format), but as a result of a subsequent examination for other patent requirements such as novelty/inventive step, it becomes necessary for the examiner to notify other reasons for rejection, a FINAL Notice of Rejection will be issued.

Amendments in response to a FINAL Notice of rejection are restricted to i) cancellation of claims, ii) further restriction of claimed elements to that in claims before the amendment), iii) correction of errors, and iv) clarification of ambiguous recitations.

(* Note that utility model applications containing multi-multi claims will be rejected for not satisfying the Basic Requirements in Article 6bis of the Utility Model Act. )

Our advice

Thus, if you discover that your application contains any multi-multi claims after filing, we advise submitting a voluntary amendment before or with the request for examination. This will avoid the possibility of receiving an unnecessary Notice of Rejection with potential constraints on amendments thereafter.

One possible way of correcting a multi-multi claim is to amend the multi-dependency in the claim to that of the lowest-numbered claim only. So in the JPO il lustration above, " as claimed in any one of claims 1-3 " would become " according to claim 1. ''

This diligence is particularly pertinent when filing an application in Japan with a priority claim under the Paris Convention or when transferring an international PCT application into the Japan national phase. It is worth checking if the claims of the priority/ international applications need amending to avoid the multi-multi claim restriction.

Naturally, we will advise you whenever any of the applications we file for you contain multi-multi claims. We will not let any such claims reach the examination stage. We employ specific multi-multi claim detection software for all our clients.

Applications not subject to the multi-multi claims restriction

The ban on multi-multi claims does not apply to divisional applications w hose filing dates are retroactive to before April 1, 2022, or to PCT applications whose international filing dates are before April 1, 2022, but which entered the Japan national phase in Japan on or after April 1, 2022 .

However, applications with a priority date before April 1, 2022, but w hose filing date is on or after April 1, 2022, are subject to the restriction.

For more information, please see the latest Ministerial Ordinance at the JPO HERE (and links therein)

Article: JPO bans multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claims (KIPB, Feb 24, 2022)

Meet KIPB Japan at APAA's 2023 Annual Meeting in Singapore

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Tue, 10 Oct 2023 12:31:22 GMT

From Nov 3-7, 2023, the Asian Patent Attorneys Association ( APAA ) will hold their 20th General Assembly and 74th & 75th Council Meetings in Singapore. Members of the KIPB team will be in attendance on-site, in addition to representatives from many other IP law firms from around the globe.

We will be represented in Singapore by our Senior Partner Goichi Takahashi ; the Head of our Patent Department, Yoshiaki Kishizawa ; and our lead on international client accounts and business development, Steve Denney from the UK.

We would love to arrange a time to meet with anyone interested in intellectual property in Japan. Please contact us at the conference (our details are on the registered list of attendees) or contact us at +81-3-6433-7507 (Tokyo office), +81-(0)80-3514-2686 (Steve's mobile/WhatsApp) or mail@kipb.net .

Further information about the event can be found at the official conference site here .

The JPO to serve official documents to some rights holders residing overseas by publication in the online patent gazette rather than by international mail.

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Fri, 14 Jul 2023 07:38:52 GMT

The JPO has announced that, as of July 3, 2023, in the event of the suspension of international mail service for six months or more , official documents will be served to rights holders residing overseas by publication in the online patent gazette ⁽¹⁾ rather than by international mail as was the case previously.

This new provision will only apply to non-resident IP rights holders (or those who do not have a business office in Japan) who have not assigned a registered patent agent or administrator in Japan to act on their behalf.

Why the revision?

Previously, the JPO delivered official documents to non-resident rights holders with no local agent by airmail or other physical means. Whilst this was not ideal, this approach was effective in normal times.

However, due to the global COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing situation in Ukraine, some countries (including Japan) have suspended their international postal services including Japan) for significant periods, making it impossible for the JPO to send such documents and hampering the progress of examinations, office actions appeals and other proceedings.

New rule

The revision effectively anticipates such disruption to mail services in future. It allows the JPO to serve such documents to the persons concerned by publishing in the JPO’s Patent Gazette or other official JPO publications where “difficulty in the delivery of documents has continued for a period of six months ”. Service by publication is deemed effective 20 days after publication in the gazette. Due dates are then unavoidably counted.

Get a Japanese patent attorney

We strongly advise any overseas applicants and rights holders who have not appointed a local patent attorney to do so for all their filings and registrations since the new rule only applies to people without local agents. There may be the case that overseas residents may fail to meet a deadline for responding to an appeal, decision, trademark cancellation, etc., due to not knowing an action has been served.

Where local agents have been appointed, they are expected to continue efforts to establish smooth communication with the overseas resident.

You can see more details on the JPO's website:

https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/system/laws/koji/index.html

https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/system/laws/sesaku/servicepub_intlmail/index.html

(1) Following the Revision of the Japan Patent (Art. 191(1) and Trademark Act (Art. 77(5) promulgated on June 14, 2023.

Link to Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review – 2023

WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Yearly Review 2023

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Thu, 13 Jul 2023 09:26:35 GMT

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recently published the 2023 edition of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Yearly Review .

The annual review presents easily accessible statistical data on trends in PCT applications, PCT national phase entries and the health of the international patent system. It also provides rankings on the biggest filing countries, multinationals, and the technical fields that are growing the fastest.

This year’s special theme centres on the welcome expansion of the PCT System from 20 member states, including Japan , in 1978 to today’s worldwide system covering over 80% of countries globally.

Global Top 10 International Patent Applications 1990-2022

Japan’s global presence

As always, Japan is prominent throughout the review, given its status as one of the ‘big beasts’ on the international patent scene, particularly in driving the success of the PCT system.

For instance, applicants from Japan have been responsible for 17.6% of all PCT applications in the 44 years since 1978. Only the US (28.9%) has had a larger share.

In 2022, the most active filers were from China, with 70,015 PCT applications originating from there. They were followed by applicants residing in the US (2nd, 59,056) and Japan (3rd, 50,345).

Almost three-quarters (73%) of the 4.8 million PCT applications filed since 1978 were filed by applicants residing in China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea and the US. Their combined share has trended upwards over time, growing from around 67% in 2000 to 79% in 2022.

( PCT Year Review 2023 )

Top PCT applicants

Chinese telecom conglomerate Huawei Technologies was the top PCT filer in 2022, with 7,689 published applications. Three Japanese companies also made the top 10: Mitsubishi Electric (4th, 2,320 applications), NTT (7th, 1,184 applications) and Panasonic IP Management (10th, 1,776 applications).

In fact, 17 of the top 50 business applicants in 2022 were Japanese-based companies , followed by China (11), the US (9), Germany (5) and Korea (4) based businesses.

Language of filing

Also, last year, around 18% of all PCT applications were first published in the Japanese language – English (43%) and Chinese (23.4%) being the other top hitters.

The top PCT geographical clusters

Tokyo–Yokohama was the largest PCT cluster between 2018 and 2022, with 127,418 PCT applications, or over 10% of all PCT applications during that period. Tokyo–Yokohama was followed by the Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou, Seoul, and San Jose–San Francisco clusters.

PCT Clusters are geographical areas within national economies or across borders that have a high density of inventors based on patent filings. They highlight the degree of innovation at the local level.

More information on the PCT system and filing in Japan

For more on the PCT system, see our article here, or check out our Intro to Filing in Japan and Patent System Q&A .

To learn more about how filing your applications in Japan could benefit your organisation, please contact us at KIPB Japan .

Link to Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review – 2023

JPO has relaxed measures for recovery of applications that have missed certain statutory deadlines including priority claim and PCT entry

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Tue, 04 Jul 2023 07:17:02 GMT

The Japan Patent Office has relaxed the requirements for requesting recovery of IP applications after the expiry of a time limit. Applicable procedures include Paris Priority , PCT Entry , Examination , translations and renewals . The rate of recovery for these and other procedures is expected to rise significantly as a result.

The new rule coincides with the ending of the emergency recovery measures relating to the impact of Covid-19 after the Japanese government downgraded the severity of the virus in May 2023.

New recovery requirement: “unintentional reasons”

Applicable procedures

The following procedures are eligible for recovery if their statutory deadlines have expired due to “unintentional” reasons.

Submitting translation of foreign language patent applications filed in a foreign language (Patent, UM)
Submitting translation of an international PCT application for entry into the national phase (Patent, UM)
Claiming domestic priority based on another application, etc. (Patent, UM)*
Claiming priority under the Paris Convention (Patent, UM, Design)*
Request for examination (Patent)
Delayed payments of patent/registration fees and surcharge (Patent, UM, Design, Trademark)
Appointment of agent for application by an overseas resident (Patent, UM)
Application for the renewal of the duration of a trademark right (Trademark)
Application for the renewal of the duration of a right based on defensive mark registration (Trademark)

Note that some requests may still be denied automatically – including if the purpose for missing the request for examination deadline was to delay the examination.

Time limits for requesting recovery

The general time limits for submitting the recovery request are:

(i) Within 2 months from the date the reason for failing to file within the statutory period ceased to exist (i.e. was noticed and rectified), and

(ii) Within 1 year (6 months for trademarks) after the missed deadline.

Priority recovery

- 14 months from the priority date for Paris route applications (i.e. 12 months priority + 2 months)

- 1 month from the translation due date for PCT route.

Late PCT entry in Japan

Recovery will be accepted if the national entry is submitted (i) within two months (plus two months for translation of the PCT spec.) from the date the unintentional reason ceased to exist and (ii) within one year from the national phase deadline.

Recovery request fees under new rules

Since the JPO expects an increase in recovery requests due to the relaxation in rules, the following official surcharge fees have been introduced to discourage more frivolous requests:

Patent: JPY212,100

Utility Model: JPY21,800

Design: JPY24,500

Trademark: JPY86,400

Procedure for submitting recovery request

The applicant should submit:

(a) Submit a statement explaining why they could not proceed within the statutory period,

(b) Provide the date when the applicant became able to proceed with the missed procedure.

Ask KIPB

Although the temporary easing of recovery procedures during COVID-19 has ended, the new “unintentional reasons” rule will make standard recovery requests much easier than before the pandemic.

Applicants were previously discouraged from seeking remedy for missed deadlines because of the onerous nature of the process and the 80-90% failure rate. Under the new rule, since recovery is likely to be successful in the majority of legitimate cases, the procedure will become a staple in the Japanese intellectual property landscape.

We have filed many recovery cases in recent years, with a success rate significantly higher than the average rate mentioned above. If you have an IP case that might be a candidate for recovery, please get in touch for a fast turnaround time.

Note that there is currently another remedy to restore applications that have missed the deadlines for a variety of other procedures not listed above. This involves showing that the time limit expiry occurred due to “reasons beyond the applicant’s control” and is more difficult to prove.

For details, see our Patent System Q&A >> OTHER QUESTIONS >> Q4: Recovery of Application After Missed Deadline

KIPB at INTA 23 in Singapore

Tue, 06 Jun 2023 03:33:39 GMT

We were delighted to attend the INTA 23 conference in Singapore, held from May 16-20, 2023. We had the pleasure of meeting with many of our long-time friends and colleagues and the opportunity to make new connections with trademark and IP professionals from around the world.

We want to thank everyone we met and the insights they provided (and the shared anecdotes they reminded us of from previous conferences!)

We would also like to thank the organizers of INTA 23 for putting on such a great event. Masahito and I had a wonderful time in Singapore, and we look forward to attending INTA 24 in 2024 in Atlanta.

Steve.

KIPB Japan at INTA´s 2023 Annual Meeting in Singapore

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Tue, 09 May 2023 14:57:42 GMT

From May 16 to 20, 2023, the International Trademark Association (INTA) will hold their Annual Meeting Live+ in Singapore. Members of the KIPB team will be in attendance on-site, in addition to numerous other companies, law firms and over 7000 participants from around the globe.

We will be represented in Singapore by our Senior Vice President and head of Trademarks, Masahito Shibata , and our lead on international client accounts and business development, Steve Denney .

We would love to arrange a time to meet with anyone interested in intellectual property in Japan. Please contact us at the conference (our details are on the registered list of attendance) or contact us at +81-3-6433-7507, +81-80-3514-2686 or mail@kipb.net.

Further information about the event can be found here .

You can find details about the program here .

Japan: Applicants can now request suspension of the examination of divisional applications during the appeal examination of the parent application.

stevedenney35@gmail.com (Steve Denney) — Tue, 09 May 2023 10:01:54 GMT

Effective from April 1, 2023, the Japanese Patent Office (JPO) has introduced a new practice to suspend the examination of specific divisional applications* whilst the parent application is still pending at appeal, upon request by applicants.

* See Eligible divisional applications below.
** (June 3, 3024) There has been a slight revision to the provisions below introduced in April 2024, according to which an application can request resumption of the suspended examination if they wish. Whilst the basic framework below still applies, also see our June 2024 post for details of the revision HERE .

Reason for the new practice

It is common for patent applicants in Japan to file precautionary divisional (child) application(s) in conjunction with an Appeal against a Decision of Rejection for the corresponding parent application, in order to maintain the prosecution of the invention regardless of the result of the appeal.

Under the previous JPO guidelines, the appeal examination of the parent and the substantive examination of the divisional ran in parallel. An office action for the divisional application was more likely to be issued before the outcome of the appeal for the parent. This effectively restricted applicants’ ability to refine their inventions and claims in response to the appeal.

According to the new rule, the applicant can now request that the examination of the divisional application be suspended until the appeal result of the parent.

The JPO believes this will make it more convenient for examiners to examine divisional applications with reference to the appeal results. It also provides applicants with opportunities to develop more efficient and effective claim strategies for the divisional application based on the outcome of the appeal.

Eligible divisional applications

Applications for which examination requests are filed on or after April 1, 2023, and which meet the following requirements:

(1) The divisional application was filed after a Decision of Rejection (office action) was issued against the parent.

(2) A request for an appeal against the Decision of Rejection has been filed for the parent, and the parent is under pre-appeal re-examination or appeal.

(3) It is advantageous to wait for the result of the pre-appeal re-examination or appeal of the parent.

* Since divsionals can be filed if office actions are issued during the pre-appeal re-examination or appeal stage, these are also eligible for the new practice .

Procedure

To request suspension of examination of the divisional, an applicant should submit (1) and (2) below to the JPO within five working days from the date the request for examination was filed.

(1) A petition for suspension of examination of the division application (under article 54(1) of the Japanese person act)

(2) A dedicated online form explaining the eligibility of the request.

KIPB Japan can advise on these procedures and file the petition and online form for you upon request.

After filing the request

The JPO will determine whether the divisional application is eligible for the new procedure and notify the applicant. This correspondence will be available to the public.

If eligible, the examination will be suspended for up to three months after any one of the following Appeal stage outcomes of the parent:

(1) A copy of the Decision of allowance during the pre-appeal re-examination stage of the parent is sent to the applicant.

(2) A copy of the first* appeal Decision (grant or rejection) is sent to the applicant.

(3) The request for appeal is withdrawn or dismissed.

After the suspension period ends, examination of the divisional application will commence and proceed as per standard examination procedures for divisionals.

* This does not include a second appeal decision issued due to a lawsuit for revoking the first appeal decision .

** It is not possible to retract the request for suspension of examination .

KIPB advice

We have long advocated for this new practice and highly recommend taking advantage of it.

It has previously also been sensible to file precautionary divisional applications when a Decision of Rejection has been issued for an application, and the applicant is unsure whether the appeal will succeed or restrict the scope of their invention. However, since the first result of the divisional examination was always more likely to come before the appeal outcome, applicants were often in a quandary as to what strategy to employ in response.

The new practice removes this unfavourable scenario and guarantees the applicant a 3-month window to reconsider/amend the scope/direction of the divisional application with knowledge of the appeal results for the parent.

Further, since divisional applications cannot be filed after a grant via an appeal, the new practice also allows applicants to pursue other inventions based on the original disclosure even after an appeal decision or allowance.

Japanese Trademark Review: When GUCCI met CUGGL

Fri, 25 Nov 2022 04:38:32 GMT

Luxury Fashion houses are very protective of their intellectual property and battle hard over their international image and trademark rights. However, this summer, Italian brand icon Gucci came up against a more unusual opponent in Japan … and lost.

Background

In March 2021, Nobuaki Kurokawa , an irreverent entrepreneur known for marketing clothing and accessories with images parodying famous logos, was granted a trademark for the following mark in Japan under Class 25, clothing and footwear.

The published mark consists of the characters “ CUGGL ” with a pink-painted line element predominantly underneath the wording. However, the T-shirts actually sol d by Kurokawa in connection to the mark (on his website called “parodys”, no less!) have the pink element obscuring most of the wording, as in the examples below.

Gucci strikes back

Gucci was quick to file an opposition with the Japanese Patent Office (JPO) in July 2021, claiming the opposed mark violated requirements in Article 4(1)(vii), (xv), and (xix) of the Japanese Trademark Act.

Art. 4(1) No trademark may be registered if it:

(vii) is likely to negatively affect public order;.....

(xv) is likely to cause confusion in connection with the goods or services pertaining to a business of another person;....

(xix) is identical with, or simila r to, a trademark which is well known among consumers in Japan or abroad as that indicating goods or services pertaining to a business of another person, and is used for unfair purposes (i.e., gaining unfair profits, causing damage to the other persons, or any other unfair purposes).

Specifically, Gucci argued that CUGGL was intentionally designed to be similar to their GUCCI mark and was filed in bad faith to free-ride on the goodwill and repute of their mark and to dilute its distinctive quality among consumers. They also added that consumers would likely assume the hidden wording in the publicly-available T-shirts relating to the mark read “ GUCCI ”, not “ CUGGL ”.

Surprise ruling

In their ruling in July 2022, the JPO acknowledged the familiarity and reputation of the GUCCI word mark amongst consumers. However, they still dismissed Gucci ’s action, finding that the two marks were sufficiently district in visual, phonetic, and conceptual terms such that the likelihood of consumers being confused about the source of goods was very low.

The JPO concluded that Gucci had not submitted any evidence that specifically indicated that CUGGL owner Kurokawa had the purpose of obtaining unfair profits or inflicting damage on their reputation.

The JPO thus formally reconfirmed the registration of the CUGGL mark in Class 25 in August 2022.

The JPO’s sense of humour?

The JPO ’s somewhat surprising ruling on the side of the upstart vs the established player may be partly due to the subjective opinion on parody.

Kurokawa has previously sought trademarks for designs that satirise other famous brands (see below). The JPO likely recognises that sophisticated Japanese consumers are too savvy to confuse such lookalike marks for the real thing.

Quoted in the Financial Times , one Japanese attorney said that the JPO “tends to decide that people are smarter than the parody-allergic big brands would like”, which may come as a shock to international powerhouses like Gucci . In c ontrast, Japanese firms such as Nissan and Honda have refrained from going after small-scale parodies in Japanese courts for years.

We might conclude that the JPO is doing its job in trying to ensure a level playing field so that smaller businesses can prosper. This is certainly in keeping with the JPO ’s 10-year plan to become the international gold standard for competitiveness and quality amongst global patent offices (see our article relating to this— ” Positive IP trends in Japan for overseas applicants .” )

Gucci’s next move?

It seems unlikely that Gucci will let things rest there. They have options, including filing infringement actions or passing off claims with respect to the Gucci name.

The GUCCI and CUGGL marks themselves may be dissimilar, but it’s harder to argue that even savvy consumers would not be confused by the T-shirts sold by Kurosawa with respect to the source of the goods.

My own impression of the T-shirt design is that it indicates some sort of protest against Gucci (most likely for fashionable purposes only). Whilst this is probably Kurokawa ’s tongue-in-cheek aim, it will be interesting to see what Japanese courts make of it if Gucci decides to pursue the matter.

KIPB's Trademark & Design Team

If you are having trouble with copycat brands or need advice on the registrability of your marks and designs in Japan, our dedicated trademarks and designs team is here to help. Get in touch anytime.

Tokyo-Yokohama ranked as World's leading science and technology hub for 2022 by WIPO

Mon, 14 Nov 2022 09:49:51 GMT

The Tokyo–Yokohama region continues to reign as the World's leading “ Science & technology (S&T) cluster ”, according to the latest edition of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) flagship Global Innovation Index (GII). Tokyo–Yokohama heads an S&T league table that includes Silicon Valley, Shanghai, Shenzhen-Hong Kong, Paris and New York in the Top 10.

Tokyo–Yokohama recognized as top 100 S&T cluster for 5 ^th year running

Each year, the GII tracks the innovative performance of more than 130 countries worldwide in various categories relating to industrial property. The purpose of the Science and technology (S&T) cluster rankings is to highlight the importance of innovation at the local level within national economies or across borders. Tokyo–Yokohama was awarded top status as the geographical area with the highest density of inventors and scientific authors based on patent-filing activity and scientific article publications.

Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto also made the 2022 S&T Top 10. Japan ranked third overall for the number of science and technology clusters behind the US, China (joint top) and Germany.

The future of innovation-driven growth

The latest GII publication also identifies two trending " innovation waves " —”The Digital Age” and “Deep Science”— that are seen as vital for driving change in the post-pandemic world that still faces significant supply-chain, energy, ecological and geopolitical challenges.

The Digital Age

The Digital Age innovation wave is built upon advances in supercomputing, AI and automated systems that a necessary to drive productivity and scientific breakthroughs across all established and emerging industries.

Japan is already recognized as a leading player in these fields and is actively incentivizing inward talent and investment in tandem with the JPO's liberalization of the intellectual property landscape for software, IoT and AI creations.

Deep Science

The Deep Science innovation wave centres on cutting-edge developments in biotechnologies, nanotechnologies, new materials and other sciences. Game-changing research in the following four related fields is critical to the future prosperity of humanity – “health, food, environment, and mobility”.

Here too, Japan stands at the forefront of innovative progress. With an ageing population, limited availability of arable land and scant natural resources – necessity has long been the mother of invention here. Japanese know-how is in increasing demand in these areas as the world begins to confront the same issues.

KIPB Japan is ready to partner with you

The staff at KIPB Japan in Tokyo are proud to represent and support the creative companies and entrepreneurs—domestic and international—that continue to make Tokyo–Yokohama ’s world-leading innovation possible.

These are difficult but exciting times. If your firm or organization wants to be part of the innovation landscape in Japan, please get in touch. We specialize in assisting overseas start-ups, SMEs and established multinationals to build and maintain their IP portfolios in Japan and worldwide.

The biggest science and technology innovation clusters in the world in 2022 (Top 10 & selected)

1 Tokyo–Yokohama

2 Shenzhen–Hong Kong–Guangzhou

3 Beijing

4 Seoul

5 San Jose–San Francisco

6 Shanghai–Suzhou

7 Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto

8 Boston-Cambridge

9 New York City

10 Paris

19 London

23 Cologne

25 Amsterdam–Rotterdam

26 Taipei–Hsinchu

30 Tel Aviv–Jerusalem

33 Singapore

35 Stockholm

36 Eindhoven

39 Melbourne

46 Istanbul

47 Brussels

51 Zürich

53 Milan

54 Toronto

71 São Paulo

73 Helsinki

Links

GII's Top 100 S&T clusters

Global Innovation Index 2022

Shape up or ship out: Can product configurations be trademarked in Japan?

Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:37:15 GMT

The physical appearance of a product is often critical to a business's commercial success—think of the iconic Coca-Cola bottle or the classic Fender guitar played by Jimi Hendrix . Many product owners thus seek to protect the valuable shape of their products as intellectual property.

Like brand names, words and logos, 3D product configurations are subject to trademark protection in Japan, but the situation is far from simple, as a famous international toymaker recently found out.

Three-dimensional trademarks

The Japanese Trademark Act states the following on 3D shape marks:

Japanese Trademark Act, Art. 2(1): A trademark may be "any character, figure, sign or t hree-dimensional shape or color, or any combination thereof; ….. used by a person in connection with a good (or services) that the person provides or certifies as its business.

Thus, in general, the appearance of a product, such as a shape or 3D shape, is registrable as a trademark in Japan

However, like other trademarks, the 3D mark must be 'distinctive' in the eyes of consumers and not merely “descriptive” of the general shape/configuration of the designated goods or services (or packaging thereof).

JPO examiners will often reject 3D mark applications on this basis, according to Article 3(1)(iii) of the Japanese Trademark Act :

Any trademark used in connection with goods or services pertaining to the business of an applicant may be registered, unless the trademark: ..... (iii) consists solely of a mark indicating, in a common manner , …. the place of origin, place of sale, quality, raw materials, efficacy, i ntended purpose, shape (including shape of packaging ......

That is, 3D marks will be dismissed if they consist solely of elements indicative “in a common manner” of a shape/configuration determined by the nature of the goods and services (or packaging thereof) themselves as recognized by consumers, or consists exclusively of the shape of goods necessary to achieve a technical result or function.

Trademark examination guidelines

The JPO is particularly strict when assessing whether 3D marks "go beyond the scope of the descriptive shape of goods" and are thus registerable.

Examination Guidelines for Trademarks, Part I, Chapter 5, Section 4 (1):

(a) Where a 3D shape is acknowledged to be adopted for t he purpose of contributing to a function or the aesthetic appeal of the designated goods , etc., …. the 3D shape is deemed to not go beyond the scope of the descriptive shape of the designated goods.

(b) Even where a 3D shape has features that have been uniquely changed or decorated, it will still be deemed as not going beyond the scope of the descriptive shape of the designated goods, in the case where consumers would perceive these changes is f or a purpose of contributing to a function or the aesthetic appeal of the designated goods .

In other words, 3D marks that simply contribute to the function or aesthetic appeal of the goods in question are deemed inherently descriptive.

As you will probably deduce, distinctiveness is thus a difficult requirement to meet from the get-go. Consumers will not ordinarily conceive a 3D mark they were previously unaware of as a source indicator/origin of the designated goods or services.

LEGO case

In a famous case concluded earlier this year, the Japanese appeal court rejected Danish toymaker LEGO 's bid to register the 3D shape of its well-known play figure under Class 28 (toys, building games) on the grounds that it did not "go beyond the scope of the descriptive shape of goods".

Acquired distinctiveness

As with other trademarks, descriptive 3D marks can become distinctive over time due to consumers coming to recognize the mark as having a source indicating function or "secondary meaning".

Japanese Trademark Act, Art. 3(2): Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, a trademark that falls under any of items (iii) through (v) of the preceding paragraph may be registered if, as a result of the use of the trademark, consumers are able to recognize the goods or services as those pertaining to a business of a particular person.

Trademark applicants often appeal against rejections based on lack of distinctiveness by arguing that their marks have “acquired” distinctiveness.

Acquired distinctiveness can be proven by evidence that consumers associate the goods or services as those pertaining to a business of a particular person (the mark's owner) due to the extensive use or market share, etc. of the mark. This evidence could be in the form of consumer surveys, sales figures or previous litigation in protecting the owner's marks or brands.

Acquired distinctiveness for 3D marks?

Convincing examiners that a 3D mark has acquired distinctiveness seems particularly onerous according to past cases at the JPO.

Consider the LEGO case above: LEGO appealed based on acquired distinctiveness, but failed to overturn the original decision. This is despite the fact ( as LEGO argued in the appeal ) that (i) they had already successfully registered substantially similar 3D shapes in the US, UK, China, South Korea, Peru, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, Chile and Denmark in relation to Class 28 goods, and (ii) their 3D figure is “widely known to consumers in countries around the world” (as the writer of this article can testify!).

Omron case—Acquired distinctiveness on appeal

In 2019, there was another well-known case in which Omron , a Japanese healthcare manufacturer, successfully argued at appeal that the shape of its 3D digital thermometer (TM6197317) had acquired distinctiveness amongst consumers due to it having a near-dominant market share and being sold for ten years previously.

The 3D mark had initially been rejected under Art. 3(1)(iii) as being a generic shape, unlikely to be conceived as a source indicator of the designated goods.

The appeal board overturned that decision, finding the 3D mark (and its packaging) to be registrable under Art. 3(2) since there was ample evidence of the uniqueness of the shape as a source indicator of Omron's marketed thermometers due to Omron's promotion and IP protection activities in the market over a long period.

Other possible forms of protection

The appearance or ornamental shape of a product can also be protected by design rights. Like trademarks, designs should not encompass a function or technical feature of the product. However, whilst designs don't need to be distinctive, they must be novel (new)—any designs that are already known will be rejected by the JPO.

A utility model may also be sought if the configuration has functionality, as long as it can be defined as a device that is novel and has technical features to solve a technical problem.

Unregistered shape marks, including certain configurations of goods, may also be protected by unfair competition laws , but this is not within the scope of our IP business. In this case, mark owners can pursue damages/injunctions for (i) negligent or intentional use of a mark that is well-known to consumers as identifying goods or (ii) imitation of a configuration of a good that is likely to confuse consumers.

Conclusion

Given the above, it is not easy to register a product configuration (3D shape) based on distinctiveness in Japan. At the very least, applicants should be prepared for stubborn JPO decisions and be ready with compelling evidence of widespread familiarity with the mark, the uniqueness of the shape as a source indicator, and proof of substantial use over a period of time, etc.

KIPB Trademark & Design Team

If you need more information on registering or protecting your 3D marks (or any of your trademarks) in Japan, our dedicated trademarks and designs team will be pleased to help. Please get in touch with us at any time.

Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) – JPO symposium on the frontier of discussions

Fri, 10 Jun 2022 12:43:57 GMT

JPO SEP Symposium 2022

The JPO recently hosted an international symposium on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), and invited experts from Japan, the US, and Europe to discuss the latest licencing issues relating to SEPs in the era of the Internet of Things (IoT) and 5G mobile communication systems.

The symposium was designed to coincide with amendments to the JPO's " Guide to Licensing Negotiations Involving Standard Essential Patents ", first published in June 2018, with the speakers covering aspects related to these amendments.

Video of the Symposium is available in English here and presentation notes for all the speeches here .

What are Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and the related licensing issues?

Standard Essential Patents (SEPs)

All products are required to meet specific industry standards. In the communications industry, for example, technical standards are in place to ensure interoperability and interconnectivity between devices made by different manufacturers.

Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) are patents that protect the technologies that are “essential” to these industry standards. Most advanced products – from smartphones to solar panels – require these key SEP-protected technologies to be standard-compliant.

Licencing involving SEPs

Manufacturers of standard-compliant products – known as “SEP implementers” – must negotiate licencing agreements with SEP holders in order to use the SEP technology. SEP holders make their patented technology available to SEP implementers under “Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory” (FRAND) grounds in exchange for acceptable royalties.

SEP licencing disputes

Disputes between SEP implementers and holders are increasingly common, with court cases rising worldwide. SEP holders can 'hold-up' negotiations to force higher licencing fees from SEP implementers. Conversely, SEP implementers sometimes 'hold-out' during negotiations to pressure SEP holders into accepting unreasonable terms.

To keep pace with technological innovations and the growing importance of SEP technology, courts have acknowledged the need to create clearer legal frameworks to achieve a more transparent and predictable SEP licensing environment.

Hot topics at JPO SEP Symposium 2022

The presenters discussed recent approaches taken by the governments and patent offices in the US, EU, UK, China and Japan. They mentioned that major IP jurisdictions are considering regulatory action on SEP and have sought opinions from all SEP stakeholders.

• In Japan, JPO and METI introduced and revised “ good faith ” negotiation guidelines in 2018, 2020 and 2022

• The US initiated two public consultations in December 2021 and April 2022

• The UK stated public consultations on SEP invitations in December 2021

• The EU started public consultations on new SEP frameworks in February 20222

Opportunities

The presenters also highlighted the financial and technological opportunities provided by the burgeoning SEP sector and warned that regulations should facilitate, not hinder, this. For instance, it is predicted that the number of interconnected communication devices requiring SEP technology will triple from 7.6 billion in 2019 to 24 billion in 2020.

SEP stakeholder strategies and “Essentiality”

In subsequent panel discussions, experts discussed the effects of recent court decisions on the approaches SEP implementers and holders take to licensing negotiations and how the “essentiality” aspect of SEPs should be checked to promote an efficient SEP licensing ecosystem for both SEP holders and implementers.

We encourage our clients and interested parties, particularly those representing small and medium-sized enterprises, to watch relevant symposium sessions, which are available till the end of July 2022.

KIPB Japan

KIPB Japan has experience in assisting foreign hi-tech firms to negotiate SEP licencing agreements with Japanese organizations that hold local SEP rights. Please contact us if you require a consultation.

The JPO publishes IP Status Report for 2022

Thu, 02 Jun 2022 04:50:10 GMT

The JPO recently published its latest IP Status Report – an annual compilation of intellectual property statistics and JPO policy outcomes from the previous year. The report presents useful information on IP trends in Japan and globally in easy-to-read graphical format, thus providing a handy reference tool for IP practitioners worldwide.

The report can be downloaded from the JPO’s website in Japanese or English.
Click on the button below for the English version.

The 2022 report highlights the JPO’s implementation of initiatives in order to maintain its record of providing “ the world’s fastest and highest quality examinations ” in the context of the new, post-COVID 19 era. This has involved permanently shifting more JPO activities online and the wholesale digitizing of IP operations.

KIPB Japan and our overseas clients have already felt the practical benefits of these moves in our day-to-day prosecution work. For instance, the JPO has eliminated the requirement for various procedural documents to be hand-sealed or signed - which has always been an onerous, time-consuming task for clients based abroad. The JPO has also broadened the scope and availability of online interviews, introduced a collaborative remote examination system amongst examiners and promoted oral court proceedings online.

The JPO Status Report 2022 also discusses recent measures that have strengthened industrial property protections for the very latest AI technologies . The JPO has also been canny in leveraging these cutting-edge technologies to improve the quality of the JPO’s examinations and operations still further.

In terms of actual statistics published in the report, we provide a few choice cuts below.

Small rise in number of patent applications

Whilst there was only a slight up-tick in the number of patent applications in Japan in 2021 over the previous year (to 289,200 from 288,472), the number of international patent applications designating Japan under the Patent Cooperation Treaty ( PCT ) continued to rise steadily (3-4% per year over the last 10 years).*

Top foreign companies

The top foreign company in terms of patent registrations in 2021 was LG Chem Ltd , the South Korean chemical conglomerate. They were followed at No. 2 by Huawei Technologies , the Chinese telecommunications giant. In third place was the Dutch electronics multinational Royal Phillips . QUALCOMM was the highest ranked US corporation, followed by General Electric in fifth place. Boeing and 3M also made it into the Top 10.

K-pop and trademarks on the rise

The number of trademark registrations in Japan in 2021 rose markedly from the previous year (174,098 from 135,313). More remarkable is the foreign company with the most trademark registrations in 2021 - Korean K-pop entertainment group SM Entertainment Limited . In 2020, they ranked 31 with only 26 registrations, but increased their presence 7-fold in 2021. Who can blame them for wanting to protect their cash-cow as the K-pop phenomenon continues to spread worldwide?
Pfizer , Amazon , Johnson & Johnson and Phillip Morris all make the top 10 for American companies.

Over three quarters of cases granted at appeal

The rate of patent requests granted in an appeal against an examiner’s decision also continues to rise in Japan, with 77% of all requests now granted, representing one of the highest grant rate amongst the top patent jurisdictions .

JPO - Gold-standard examinations

We encourage readers to take a leisurely look at the report for insights into the progress being made towards achieving the JPO’s objective of establishing the Japanese IP system as the international gold-standard for competitiveness and quality, in collaboration with other major IP offices.

* Includes Japan as one of the designated countries and for which documents to enter the national phase were submitted to the JPO

Filing patents in Japan: What are PCT Applications?

Thu, 26 May 2022 12:42:47 GMT

Patents are national monopoly rights, and applicants seeking multinational protection must apply in each country of interest. Applying separately in each country is obviously an onerous task – which is where PCT applications come in. They allow applicants to file a single international patent application covering over 150 countries, including Japan.

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and WIPO

The PCT International phase

After the PCT application has been filed, it enters the PCT international phase. During this phase, an International Searching Authority ("ISA" - one of the world’s leading patent offices, such as the JPO) will produce a search report (International Search Report - "ISR") and an opinion (Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority - "WO/ISA") relating to the potential patentability of the claimed invention.

The PCT application will also be published by WIPO 18 months from the priority date, so third parties can see it. The applicant may also request supplemental searches and preliminary examinations by second ISAs if their application has been amended or requires more evidence of patentability.

The international phase lasts a total o f 30 months (or 31 months, depending on the country*) from the “priority date” of the original application. By the end of this time, the applicant should decide to select the individual countries in which they wish to seek protection. This decision could be based on factors such as the potential commercial value of the applicant's product or the strength of the patent rights they can obtain.

Entering the PCT National phase

At the end o f the international phase, the international PCT application enters the PCT national phase, a nd converts into separate “national” (domestic) applications according to the countries selected by the applicant. Thereafter, these national stage applications are prosecuted individually according to the IP laws in each country.

* The deadline for entering the PCT national phase in Japan is 30 months from the priority date. The Japanese application can be filed in English, but must be translated into Japanese within 2 months.

Benefits of the PCT application system

A PCT application is generally preferred when an applicant wishes for more time and options in deciding which countries to file in. The centralized search and examination by the international search authorities also simplifies prosecution matters at least till the national phase.

Benefits of filing PCT applications in Japan

KIPB Japan is here to help

If you would like to find out more about filing PCT patent applications in Japan and how this could benefit your organization, please feel free to contact us at KIPB Japan .

External links:

JPO to simplify criteria for restoration of IP rights after expiry of a deadline

Tue, 08 Mar 2022 02:23:04 GMT

Restoration of IP rights in Japan

The Japan Patent Office will simplify the requirements for applications seeking restoration / recovery of patents and other types of IP applications after the expiry of a time limit. The relaxed requirements are expected to reduce the procedural burden on such applicants as well as significantly increase the JPO’s acceptance rate of recovery requests.

The new rule is scheduled to come into effect from April 1, 2023 *, after amendments to Japanese IP laws were enacted last year. It will apply to all types of IP application** and various statutory time limits during standard IP prosecution, such as a filing deadline or due date for annuities etc.

Recovery requirements previously too strict

Setting aside the temporarily rules for recovery during the global Covid-19 pandemic for one moment (see below), the general requirements for successful recovery after an expired deadline has been very difficult to meet up to this point. An applicant was required to submit “ legitimate reasons ” (outside of reasonable control) for failing to meet a deadline and proof that the failure occurred despite “ due care ” by appropriate patent management systems and qualified management staff. Detailed supporting evidence of these “unavoidable” circumstances was also mandatory – human error was not an admissible reason.

It is generally accepted that this strict interpretation of “legitimate reasons” and “due care” and the mandatory documentary evidence placed an unfair burden on applicants, that has contributed to much lower recovery acceptance rates in Japan (10-20%) compared to other jurisdictions (e.g., US–90%; EU–60-70%).

Rule revisions

The new rule reduces the recovery standard from “legitimate reasons” and “due care” to “ unintentional ” reasons for missing a deadline. The scope of admissible reasons also now includes human error as well as procedural management error. The submission of evidential documents will also be voluntary rather than mandatory.

New fees

The JPO has also introduced official fees for filing a request for recovery under the new rules. These are as follows: Patents - 297,000 yen ; Utility Models - 50,000 yen ; Designs - 25,000 yen ; and Trademarks - 102,000 yen . The new fees are expected to encourage only applicants with genuine reasons for missing a deadline, rather than reliance on the new rule as a general strategy.

Recovery Request citing Covid-19

Due to the impact of the Covid-19 global pandemic, the JPO has temporarily relaxed the requirements for requesting recovery. Thus, at the time of writing and until the new rules come into force, if an application simply states that the reason for failure to meet a deadline was as a result of Covid -19 (e.g., lockdown, illness etc), recovery will generally be granted. No supporting evidence is necessary.

For your reference, please see our explanation of the current Covid-19 related recovery requirements (go to M.4 Recovery of Application After Missed Deadline ):

KIPB is here to help

The upshot of all this is that recovery is likely to become easier than has previously been the case. If you would like KIPB to help you with a case that needs restoration, please feel free to contact us.

---------------------------------------------------------

* Date has not been formally announced.

** Scope of applications expected to include both PCT filings (e.g. failure to meet the 30-month Japan national entry deadline) and Paris Convention filings, and well as trademark, utility model and design filings.

*** Above Table compiled from data provided by the Japan Patent Attorneys Association (JPAA).

JPO bans multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claims

Thu, 24 Feb 2022 06:57:12 GMT

The JPO has announced that multiple dependent claims depending on multiple dependent claims (known as “multi-multi claims” in Japan) will no longer be permitted in Japanese patent and utility model applications. The new rule applies to patent and utility model applications filed on or after April 1, 2022 (**see notes below).

What are multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claims (multi-multi claims)?

First, a multiple dependent claim is a dependent claim that cites back to more than one claim. (e.g. Claim 3: A device as claimed in claim 1 or 2, further comprising C.)

A multiple dependent claim depending on other multiple dependent claims is “a claim that selectively cites two or more other claims that also selectively cite back to two or more other claims” (revised JPO guidelines).

To illustrate, please see the following example set of claims:

Claim 1 A device with A.　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　
Claim 2 A device as claimed in claim 1 further comprising B.　　　　　　　　　
Claim 3 A device as claimed in claim 1 or 2, further comprising C. 　　　　
Claim 4 A device as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 3, further comprising D.
Claim 5 A device as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 4, further comprising E.

Here, claim 3 is a multiple dependent claim only, so still allowed.
However, claims 4 and 5 are multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claim(s) and are thus no longer allowed.

That is:

Claim 3 selectively cites two or more other claims (claims 1 or 2), but claims 1 or 2 do not selectively cite other claims.
Claim 4 selectively cites two or more other claims (any of claims 1-3), AND any of these claims 1-3 (i.e., claim 3) cites two or more other claims.
Claim 5 selectively cites two or more other claims (any of claims 1-4), AND any of those claims 1-4 (i.e., claims 3, 4) cite two or more other claims.

Office actions against multi-multi claims

According to the new guidelines, a first office action will be issued for patent applications filed on or after April 1, 2022, which include multi-multi claims*. These rejected claims will not be examined for any other substantive requirements such as inventive step or novelty.

Claims that cite multi-multi claims will are also not subject to examination for other substantive requirements. So, if the example claim set above contained a claim 6 which stated “ The device according to claim 4, wherein D is made of x ”, this claim would not be subject to examination for other substantive requirements.

In our example claim set above, only claims 1-3 would be substantively examined.

Final Notice of Rejection
If an amendment to overcome the multi-multi claim rejection is found to contain another reason for rejection, a FINAL Notice of Rejection will be issued, and related amendment restrictions (compared to first office actions) imposed.

Utility models
In the case of a utility model application, an order to amend will be issued as the claims do not meet the basic requirements for utility models.

Note also that according to the JPO, whilst multi-multi claims will be a reason for rejection, they will not be considered a reason for opposition or invalidation.

Reason for rule change

The JPO’s rationale for the change to the guidelines is that the examination of multi-multi claims places an unreasonable burden on examiners, which is disproportionate to the actual number of claims. This is because the number of combinations of features increases exponentially for such claims that lack definitive dependency/citation.

The JPO also notes that multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claims are already disallowed in the US, China and Korea, so banning such claims in Japan will increase harmonization and conformity to international standards.

KIPB is here to help

Applicants should avoid multi-multi claims for applications filed after on or after April 1, 2022. We will check and advise you on this at or before the time of requesting substantive examination so that any necessary amendments can be made.

--------------------------------------------------------------

* Reason for rejection: Violation of Article 36(6)(iv) of the Patent Act - claim description not composed in accordance with the Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

** The above information is based on that published by the JPO. See the following on applicable “filing dates on or after April 1, 2022”:

Divisional (and converted) applications. The priority date will apply when considering multi-multi claims, not the actual filing date of the divisional. That is, multi-multi claims will still be allowed for the divisional if the parent application was filed before April 1, 2022 even if the divisional is filed on or after April 1, 2022, (assuming all requirements as a divisional application are met. If not, multi-multi claims will be disallowed.)
PCT applications. The new rule will not apply for PCT applications with international filing dates before April 1, 2022, but entered the Japan national phase on or after this date.
Paris Convention applications. The rule change will apply to Paris Convention applications which have a filing date in Japan on or after April 1, 2022, even if the date they claim priority to is before April 1, 2022.

Making sense of the Japanese Patent Numbering System

Mon, 31 Jan 2022 08:09:12 GMT

Confused about patent application numbers? Here's our handy guide.

Application number

All new filings in Japan are given an initial application number. For domestic and Paris Convention filings, application numbers are issued as soon as the patent application is filed in Japan. It may take PCT filings entering the Japan national phase a few extra days or weeks to get theirs.

Application Number in Japanese and English
Application numbers read 特願 2022-XXXXXX in Japanese and JP2022-XXXXXX (or, in full, Japanese Patent Application No. 2022-XXXXXX) in English - the first 4 digits are the year of filing, which is followed by 6 more digits.

For PCT applications that have entered the Japanese national phase, the 6-digit number starts with a 5. So, JP2018-512345 in dicates a PCT nationalized application filed in 2018.

This is how this application number appears on the Japanese searchable database J-PlatPat. ( https://www.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/ ) Note that application numbers are only searchable on the site once they’ve been published.

Before 2000- the Japanese calendar

To complicate matters, application numbers before 2000 were based on the Japanese calendar. The Japanese calendar marks the eras of chronological emperors and is still more commonly used in business and daily life than the western one.

The most relevant imperial eras for our purposes are Showa (昭和) 1-64 (1926-1989) and Heisei (平成) 1-31 (1989-2019). Thus, for example, Japanese patent applications filed in Showa 1 are w ritten S01-XXXXXX (昭01-XXXXXX), and Heisei 1 filings are written H01-XXXXXX (平01-XXXXXX) .

You may still see such applications cited in office actio ns. You can work out the western dates by looking online – which most Japanese patent attorneys also have to do! Thankfully, this system finished in Heisei 11 (1999).

Publication Number

Publication

After a certain period of time, applications are published (or “laid open for public viewing”) in the patent gazette and on the JPO’s online database (J-PlatPat), and receive a publication number to replace the initial application number above. Once published, an application is searchable by third-parties. Note that publication does not mean the application has been formerly examined yet (see our Q&A for more details on Examination.)

Publication timing?

The timing of publication depends on the type of application. Domestic and Paris Convention filings are published 18 months after filing. PCT applications that have entered the national phase in Japan are published on average about 7-8 months after submission of their Japanese translations. PCT translations have to be filed within two-months of national entry.

Publication Number in English

In simplest form, all publication numbers follow the same format as application numbers, i.e., JP + date (Japanese or western calendar) + 6-digits. However, English publication numbers include an “A” at the end to distinguish them from application numbers—so JP2021-511223A for example.

Publication Number in Japanese

In Japanese, publication numbers differ according to whether they are domestic/Paris Convention applications or applications based on PCT applications entered in Japan. For our purposes:

Domestic/Paris derived applications are known as "Kokai" publications, or "unexamined patent publications" in Japanese. They begin with 特開, which is commonly written as "Japanese Laid Open Patent Publication No.” in offices actions translations, etc.
Applications derived from PCT applications entered at the Japan national phase are called "Kohyo" publications or "National Publications" in Japanese. They begin with 特表 - translated in full as “Japanese Patent Gazette Laid-open Publication No.”.

To illustrate using our example above: Application number JP2018-512345 was published as JP2018-526753A (or Japanese Patent Gazette Laid-open Publication No. JP2018-526753), or 特表2018-526753 in Japanese.

Patent Number

After publication, examination and allowance, the application will be registered and issued with a 7-digit patent number. A ‘B’ is added to the simplified number in English, so JPXXXXXXXB (Japanese Patent No. XXXXXXX). In Japanese, a patent is written 特許 XXXXXXX (tokkyo).

Thus, in our example, JP2018-526753A received the patent number JP6644482B (特許6644482.)

Here is the published patent JP6644482B document in Japanese, which includes the application number, publication number and the patent number.

BONUS QUESTION: Very good, but when can a third party know my application has been filed in Japan?

JPO & USPTO agree to improve PPH programs

Wed, 19 Jan 2022 04:03:10 GMT

The JPO & USPTO's new PPH pledge will benefit applicants

What is PPH?

PPH (Patent Prosecution Highway) is a fast-track patent examination scheme between participating counties that allows an applicant to request expedited examination of an application pending at one or more patent offices (e.g. Offices of Later Examination (OLE)) when a corresponding application pending at another office (e.g. Office of Earlier Examination (OEE)) has been determined to have at least one patentable claim by Examination.

PPH is therefore a valuable tool for applicants planning their global IP portfolios. It enhances the use of search and examination results between offices, meaning faster, more consistent examination, a reduced number of office actions, and earlier patent decisions across the desired jurisdictions.

The new 3-month target agreed by the JPO and USPTO

PPH programs have greatly contributed to reducing the time to an office action in all participating countries. However, the actual time period has never previously been guaranteed. This has led to inconsistencies between jurisdictions and caused uncertainty for applicants.

Consequently, as originators of PPH and its key drivers, the JPO and USPTO have decided to formally commit to the three-month targets from commencement of examination after a PPH request to first office actions. The new commitment will also apply to subsequent office actions after a response by an applicant to an office action under PPH.

In a joint statement, the two patent offices said: “With almost 30% of all PPH applications in the world having been filed with the JPO or the USPTO in 2020, the two Offices will continue to lead the effort to promote the PPH as the original initiators of this innovative scheme, which began in 2006.”

We can expect to see other PPH participating offices following the JPO and USPTO’s lead.

Tables 1&2 - Targets set by the JPO and USPTO:

How might PPH benefit you?

PPH programs offer applicants great benefits including accelerated patent allowances, high rates of allowance, and the potential of large cost savings due to reduced time and number of actions.

The JPO has the largest PPH network in the world. Selecting the JPO as the office of earlier examination maximize s an applicant's options for later examination. By leveraging the JPO's PPH network and its speedy and highly respected examination, international applicants can be confident of quick and efficient acquisition of quality rights in any of the most important IP jurisdictions in the world.

Who does Japan have PPH agreements with?

The JPO currently has bilateral PPH agreements with 46 IP offices (see Table 3 ). In terms of numbers, over 13,000 PPH application requests have been received at the JPO from the US, around 6,500 from the EPO and more than 1,200 from Korea (2020 JPO figures).

Table 3 - The JPO’s PPH agreements (fully implemented and trials)

Table 3 notes:

● = Only available if the original patent application or PCT application has been filed with both offices.

△ = Since these offices are not ISA or IPEA under the PCT system, PPH is only available if the first application is in Japan.

Normal PPH, PPH Mottainai, PCT-PPH = There are actually various types of PPH program. For example, Normal PPH requires that the application be found patentable in the “office of first filing” (OFF) in order to apply for PPH. PPH MOTTAINAI makes PPH available for applications found allowable/patentable in an 'office or earlier examination result' (OEE) regardless of the Office of First Filing.

Table 3 created from figures compiled in the JPO’s Annual Report for 2021 (p.115):

https://www.jpo.go.jp/resources/report/nenji/2021/document/index/honpenall.pdf

For more details on the PPH program at the JPO (including the new 3-month targets), please see:

https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/system/patent/shinsa/soki/pph/index.html

New JPO Fees

Wed, 03 Nov 2021 16:07:10 GMT

JPO to raise some patent and trademark fees, effective from April 1, 2022

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) recently announced an increase in some patent and trademark fees that will come into effect from April 1, 2022. The new fees will apply to patent annuities (maintenance) and trademark registrations and renewals (see the table below).

The JPO deems these increases necessary because it has been operating at a loss for the last few years. This is in large part due to the JPO’s drive for world-leading digital and infrastructure improvements, as well as the higher examination costs associated with a rising number of international prior art publications. That said, official fees at the JPO are still very competitive compared to other offices such as the USPTO.

Contact KIPB Japan

For those with relevant fees pending or considering new trademark filings in Japan, please contact us at KIPB Japan to take advantage of the current JPO schedule before the April 1, 2022 effective date for these changes. We can also offer advice to small businesses, independent inventors and research institutions, etc who may be able to take advantage of the JPO's fee reduction scheme for annuities etc.

Positive IP trends in Japan for overseas applicants

Tue, 21 Sep 2021 15:02:52 GMT

In 2014, the Japan Patent Office set an ambitious goal – to establish the Japanese IP system as the international gold-standard for competitiveness and quality. Despite the global economic setbacks caused by Covid-19, this goal is being realized – as evidenced by the figures presented below.

Two key aims of the JPO's policy have been to achieve the World's Fastest and highest quality in patent examination , as well as the further internationalization of the IP system . To this end, the JPO has focused on measures that will maintain the speed of examination, grant the highest quality rights and deepen cooperation and collaboration with other IP offices through multinational frameworks like the Patent Prosecution Highway and international examiner programs.

Faster Examination Speed

The JPO has succeeded in reducing the average examination times until first and final decisions to the shortest in the IP5 jurisdictions (US, China, Japan, Korea and Europe). Reasons for this success include: increasing the availability and quality of examiners, outsourcing prior art searches to specialists in the private sector, and the development of a patented Search System using AI for retrieval of prior art worldwide.

Accelerated Examination

The JPO also offers Accelerated Examination and Super Accelerated Examination for applications filed internationally and/or by SMEs and research institutes, etc. Average time till first office action (FA pendency) in 2020 was 0.9 months and 2.7 months respectively.

PPH - International Cooperation on Examination

First initiated between the JPO and USPTO in 2006, the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is a collaborative patent acceleration program under which an application determined to be patentable in a jurisdiction of first filing may undergo faster examination in a second office by simple procedure upon the applicant’s request. The JPO now has PPH agreements with over fifty countries, including a new collaboration with the French IP office signed this year.

The latest figures show that filing via PPH reduces FA pendency and increases patent grant rates. This in turn lowers all round filing costs due to the quicker turnaround and lower number of actions.

Green = normal application

Blue = PPH application

Favourable Appeal System

The applicant-friendly attitude of the JPO is also evident at the appeal stage. In 2020, around 50% of all applications rejected at the examination stage were subsequently granted in a pretrial re-examination conducted by the original examiner (automatically initiated whenever appeal stage amendments are made.) Furthermore, 70% of those applications rejected in the pretrial re-examination were allowed at the appeal trial proper (conducted by 3 or 5 new examiners).

Consistently High Grant Rates

Consistently high patent grant rates compared to the IP5 is more evidence of the JPO's drive to achieve the fastest and highest quality examination. The overall grant rate has been around 75% for the past 4 years (up from 55% ten years ago.) The JPO intends to maintain a consistently high grant rate over the long-term, giving applicants more certainty in planning their IP strategies.

Improvements to Quality of Rights

The JPO has also recognized that positive trends in terms of examination expediency and grant rate should not negatively impact on the quality of rights. The JPO's strategic vision places particular emphasis on the need for patent rights to be strong, so they cannot easily be overturned; broad, for the widest coverage possible; and useful, so they can be commercially applied.

Other contributory factors to the JPO's high quality of examination - and thus most valuable protection - include the following initiatives.

Quality Management Framework

The JPO has implemented a new quality management framework for greater consultation and cross-checking between examiners. More recently, the JPO has sought ways for collaborative examinations between teams of examiners across multiple filings and IP types in a single applicant's IP portfolio. Collective examination can be requested by applicants, ensuring timely acquisition of reliable rights.

Examiner Interviews

The JPO is also actively encouraging interview examinations to facilitate communication and understanding between examiners and applicants. The system is much more user-friendly than in previous years, and examiners are more willing to take another look at objections and suggest allowable claims. In response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the JPO not only conducts interviews at their offices, but also on-site and online via video conferencing with applicants located anywhere in the World.

Evidence of the continued improvement in examination quality and the rights that applicants can achieve is borne out in user satisfaction surveys conducted by the JPO, such as the one below targeting Japanese and foreign businesses, and Japanese agents of foreign applicants.

JPO Fee Reduction for Small Businesses and Universities

The realization of the JPO's policy objectives makes Japan an ideal place for overseas business and SMEs to pursue their international IP strategies. To encourage more such applicants, the JPO has also introduced a more advantageous examination and maintenance fee reduction scheme for start-ups, small business, research facilities and individual inventors. Qualification for the scheme – which reduces fees to half or third of normal fees - does not usually require any documentary evidence. Many of KIPB's international clients have taken this opportunity.

Increases in International Applications in Japan

Whilst the number of patent applications in Japan filed by domestic applicants continues to decline slowly for a number of reasons, the total of international patent applications under PCT that designate Japan for national phase entry continues to rise. These trends possibly reflect strategic moves by international businesses focusing on obtaining rights of greater quality and global reach rather than just broad-based and local rights.

Uptick in Utility Model Filings

The overall number of newly filed utility models in Japan also jumped 14% in 2020 over 2019. This has reversed a 7-year downward trend, which may partly be down to applicants choosing to file utility models instead of full patent applications due to concerns about the economic impact of the global pandemic. Utility models are cheaper and quicker to grant than patents and do not have to go through examination (though protection and enforcement is not as strong.)

Japan - First Port of Call for your IP

With its fast and high-quality examination, stable grant rate, and broad and reliable rights, KIPB Japan believes that Japan will continue to be a patent hub of choice for innovative global businesses planning to widen their international patent coverage to other jurisdictions with the best protection possible.

*Above figures compiled from the following sources:

The Japanese cabinet office’s Intellectual Property Strategic Program 2014

The JPO’s Status Report 2021

The JPO's Annual Report 2021 (Japanese)

WIPO's PCT Yearly Review 2020

IP5 Statistics Report 2019

KIPB Moves Office

Wed, 05 May 2021 13:23:39 GMT

KIPB is happy to announce that we have moved to a more convenient location in the heart of Tokyo, which is better suited to our customers and employees’ changing needs.

The move perpetuates KIPB’s 28-year history of providing outstanding intellectual property services for our domestic and international partners.

Our new address, telephone and fax numbers is as follows:

Kita-Aoyama International Patent Bureau (KIPB Japan)

Maruei Bldg. 5F,

1-9-7 Jinnan, Shibuya-ku,

Tokyo 150-0041,

JAPAN

Tel: 03-6433-7507

Fax: 03-6433-7508

We ask you to send all physical mail to the above mailing address from now on.
Our email address remains the same - mail@kipb.net .

We thank you for taking the time to update your records, and we look forward to continuing to work with you from our new location.

New location - Shibuya

Our new office is in central Shibuya – the dynamic commercial and financial hub which has seen exciting innovations and an influx of business start-ups in recent years. We decided to make the move to take advantage of the new opportunities and working styles that have resulted from the pandemic. We are well-placed to continue serving you with the same quality and bespoke attention to detail.

Once we all come through the pandemic, it would be our pleasure to invite you to visit us the next time you are in Japan. Shibuya is not just a destination for trend-setting shops and fantastic restaurants: we also have Tokyo's most historically important and picturesque Shinto shrine – Meiji Jingu - on our doorstep. We'd be honoured to show you modern and traditional Japan in one afternoon!

kipb-jp

The 2026 JPO Status Report: Japan as a Premier Destination for Strategic IP Filing

1. Examination Pendency: Still the Fastest in the IP5

2. The Hague System: Moving on up

3. Appeals: High Success Rates for Applicants

4. Modernised Examination

The KIPB take:

Meet with KIPB at INTA 2026 in London

KIPB at APAA 2025 in KL

KIPB Japan at APAA 2025 – Kuala Lumpur, November 6–10

KIPB - Make the switch

KIPB at INTA 2025 in San Diego

Make the switch

Meet KIPB Japan at INTA 2025 in sunny San Diego!

KIPB Japan — Make the switch

Finding the Best IP Law Firm in Japan for International Corporations, Startups, and SMEs

Why Japan is a Critical Market for IP Protection

Choosing the Right IP Firm in Japan

Why KIPB is the Right Partner for You

Make the switch

Applicants can now request a resumption of examination of a divisional application that has been suspended during the appeal examination of the parent application.

Previously, requesting resumption of examination was not possible

Revised rules

Advantages of provision to request resumption of examination

Happy Japanese Invention Day, everyone!

Restriction on multi-multi claims

What is a multi-multi claim?

Examination of multi-multi claims (and disadvantages to the scope of allowed claims)

Our advice

Applications not subject to the multi-multi claims restriction

Article: JPO bans multiple dependent claims depending on other multiple dependent claims (KIPB, Feb 24, 2022)

Meet KIPB Japan at APAA's 2023 Annual Meeting in Singapore

The JPO to serve official documents to some rights holders residing overseas by publication in the online patent gazette rather than by international mail.

Why the revision?

New rule

Get a Japanese patent attorney

Link to Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review – 2023

WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Yearly Review 2023

Global Top 10 International Patent Applications 1990-2022 ﻿

Japan’s global presence

Top PCT applicants

Language of filing

The top PCT geographical clusters

More information on the PCT system and filing in Japan

Link to Patent Cooperation Treaty Yearly Review – 2023

JPO has relaxed measures for recovery of applications that have missed certain statutory deadlines including priority claim and PCT entry

New recovery requirement: “unintentional reasons”

Applicable procedures

Time limits for requesting recovery

Recovery request fees under new rules

Procedure for submitting recovery request

Ask KIPB

KIPB at INTA 23 in Singapore

KIPB Japan at INTA´s 2023 Annual Meeting in Singapore

Japan: Applicants can now request suspension of the examination of divisional applications during the appeal examination of the parent application.

Reason for the new practice

Eligible divisional applications

Procedure

After filing the request

KIPB advice

Japanese Trademark Review: When GUCCI met CUGGL

Background

Gucci strikes back

Surprise ruling

The JPO’s sense of humour?

Gucci’s next move?

KIPB's Trademark & Design Team

Tokyo-Yokohama ranked as World's leading science and technology hub for 2022 by WIPO

Tokyo–Yokohama recognized as top 100 S&T cluster for 5 th year running

The future of innovation-driven growth

The Digital Age

Deep Science

KIPB Japan is ready to partner with you

The biggest science and technology innovation clusters in the world in 2022 (Top 10 & selected)

Links

Shape up or ship out: Can product configurations be trademarked in Japan?

Three-dimensional trademarks

Trademark examination guidelines

LEGO case

Acquired distinctiveness

Global Top 10 International Patent Applications 1990-2022

Tokyo–Yokohama recognized as top 100 S&T cluster for 5 ^th year running