en

Software and business method patents are treated very differently in Japan, the US, and Europe. This article compares Japan's hardware-cooperation standard, the US Alice/Mayo framework and §101 rejections, and the EPO's technical effect requirement—explaining why the same invention may be patentable in one jurisdiction but not another.

Patent invalidation trials (Article 123 of Japan's Patent Act) can eliminate a granted patent retroactively. This article covers grounds for invalidity, the trial procedure, comparison with US IPR and EPO opposition proceedings, and how invalidation is used as a defense strategy in infringement litigation.

A PCT application preserves the option to seek patent protection in 157 countries through a single international filing, extending the window for national phase entry to 30 months. This guide covers the four-phase process, costs, comparison with the Paris Convention route, and when SMEs should use PCT.

Prior use rights (Article 79 of Japan's Patent Act) allow a party practicing an invention before a patent was filed to continue doing so after grant. This article covers the legal requirements, the 'business preparation' standard from case law, and the risks of relying on prior use rights instead of filing.

Patent infringement analysis involves claim construction, element-by-element comparison, and the doctrine of equivalents. This article covers direct and indirect infringement, injunctive relief and damages under Japan's Patent Act Articles 100 and 102, and why most disputes settle.

Patent claims define the legal boundaries of patent protection. This article explains independent and dependent claim structures, the doctrine of equivalents, literal versus equivalent infringement, and the relationship between claims and the patent specification.

Patent prosecution moves through filing, publication, examination request, substantive examination, office actions, and either grant or rejection. This guide walks through each step with official timelines, costs, and a comparison of Japan, US, and European procedures.

Novelty and inventive step (non-obviousness) are the two most-litigated patentability requirements. This article explains their legal definitions under Japanese, US, and European law, and how they are argued in examination, opposition, and invalidity proceedings.