Hirota & Associates to Japanese page TopicsRecruitingLinksSite Map
Practice AreasPatent AttorneysForeign Patent FirmsAbout UsAccess MapContact Us


Contact Us
Home > Topics



  • Organized a joint seminar with D YOUNG & CO.
    On November 13, 2014, we organized a joint seminar with D YOUNG & CO. on the protection of healthcare, medtech and diagnostic inventions, having EPO Director as a guest.
    From our firm, Mr. Kazuhiro Matsuda, patent attorney, gave a presentation on iPS cells.
    The documents of Mr. Matsuda's presentation are available from here.
  • On January 27, 2012, the IP High Court issued a grand panel decision in an infringement suit in which Mr. Masanori Hirota of Hirota & Associates was engaged as a patent attorney for the defendant. The grand panel decision was for the defendant and the issue in this case was whether a product-by-process claim is interpreted by the process limitation theory or by the product identity theory. An English summary of the court decision is provided by the IP High Court and is available at: http://www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/documents/g_panel.html (2010(Ne)10043 Appeal Case of Seeking Injunction against Patent Infringement)
  • System of provision of information
    • There is a rule stipulated with regard to the system of provision of information after a patent grant in Article 13(3) of the Patent Law Implementing Regulations, and the Japan Patent Office website states that the system of provision of information after a patent grant has the following benefits:
    1. a patent holder can review provided information prior to the intended utilization of the patent as well as cure the defect of the patent as necessary by a correction trial so that an unwanted conflict is prevented in advance;
    2. a person who intends to demand an invalidation trial can demand the trial after referring to information provided by then so that the person can present more fulfilling grounds and evidences for invalidation, and therefore can complement the function of re-examination of a granted patent;
    3. when an invalidation trial or correction trial is demanded, the content of provided information is to be supplied along with a record of a patent application in a trial record wrapper for the invalidation trial or correction trial so that trial examiners can confirm the content of the information and can make the information a subject of examination by official authority, and thus more prompt and appropriate examination can be expected; and
    4. when a correction trial is demanded in parallel with an infringement suit, a person who is alleged to have infringed (normally, the defendant in the trial) can present to trial examiners an evidence used to defend against abuse of right of the plaintiff in the suit by utilizing the system, and therefore even in an examination of an ex parte correction trial where an opposing party does not exist, trial examiners can carry out an appropriate examination in connection with requirement for correction such as independent patentability requirement.

Jan. 2006

  • 10th Anniversary
    • We celebrated our 10th Anniversary on January 2006.
      spacer(at our 10th Anniversary party, Feb. 17, 2006)

Oct. 3, 2005

  • Filing via Internet begins from October 2005.
    • We can handle internet applications with the start of the service of JPO.

June 30, 2005

  • We have renewed our website.