• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Changes to the civil procedure laws and regulations prompted by specialized litigation: Regarding the United States and the Japanese patent invalidation procedures.
【24h】

Changes to the civil procedure laws and regulations prompted by specialized litigation: Regarding the United States and the Japanese patent invalidation procedures.

机译：由专门诉讼引起的民事诉讼法律和法规的变化：关于美国和日本的专利无效程序。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Dispute on the validity of patents is deemed as a typical case which requires special procedural rules and system. This is because of the technical specialty in the subject matter, and the preceding administrative patent prosecution procedure.;In the United States, federal courts have jurisdiction over disputes on the validity of patents, the same as ordinary civil cases. Even in patent litigation the parties have primary responsibility to provide special technical knowledge for the case under the general adversary principle. The shortcomings of patent litigation include: the cost of the parties' experts; self-serving "junk science"; and forum-shopping. To address theses shortcomings reexamination was created as an alternative administrative procedure. Nevertheless, both litigation and administrative procedure requires further improvement.;The Japanese patent system has the invalidation trial, which is a special administrative procedure adjudicated at the patent office under the ex officio investigation principle. This administrative procedure has exclusive jurisdiction over patent invalidation and is subject to direct appeal to the Intellectual Property High Court. Therefore, a court hearing an infringement suit traditionally did not have authority to declare invalidity. However, following the "Kilby" decision of the Japanese Supreme Court, the Patent Law codified that an accused infringer may raise a defense that a patent at issue is unenforceable. Now, because infringement suits find invalidity more actively than the traditional route of an invalidation trial and the appeal suit, there is an issue about how to coordinate the "double track" procedures.;For the United States, I propose creation of post-grant opposition procedure which enhances reasons for invalidation and parties' opportunity to argue. Further, concentration of jurisdiction and utilization of neutral experts to strengthen expertise of litigation procedure at trial courts are also proposed. For Japan, I propose further clarification of the treatment for inconsistent finalized decisions of infringement litigation and an invalidation trial. Revision of the basis for standing to request invalidation is also proposed.;Argument and reform which patent invalidation procedure experienced will be a milestone to consider solutions to deal with other areas of specialized litigation which needs to breakthrough traditional thinking and operation.
机译：专利有效性争议被认为是典型案例，需要特殊的程序规则和制度。这是因为该主题的技术专长以及先前的行政专利起诉程序。在美国，联邦法院对专利有效性的争议拥有管辖权，与普通民事案件相同。即使在专利诉讼中，当事方也有主要责任，根据一般对抗原则为案件提供特殊的技术知识。专利诉讼的缺点包括：当事人的专家费用；自私的“垃圾科学”；和论坛购物。为了解决这些缺点，创建了重新检查作为替代的行政程序。尽管如此，诉讼和行政程序都需要进一步改进。；日本专利制度具有无效审判程序，这是根据职权调查原则在专利局裁定的一种特殊行政程序。该行政程序对专利无效拥有专属管辖权，可直接向知识产权高等法院上诉。因此，传统上，法院在审理侵权诉讼时无权宣布无效。但是，根据日本最高法院的“ Kilby”裁决，《专利法》将被指控的侵权人提出了抗辩理由，认为所涉专利不可执行。现在，由于侵权诉讼比无效审判和上诉诉讼的传统途径更积极地发现无效，因此存在一个有关如何协调“双轨”程序的问题。；在美国，我建议创建授权后异议程序，增加了无效的理由和当事方进行辩论的机会。此外，还建议集中管辖权并利用中立专家来加强审判法院诉讼程序的专业知识。对于日本，我建议进一步澄清针对侵权诉讼和无效审判的最终决定不一致的处理方式。还提出了请求无效宣告的依据的修订。专利无效程序所经历的争论和改革将是考虑解决其他需要突破传统思维和运作方式的专门诉讼领域的解决方案的里程碑。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kudo, Toshitaka.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Washington.;

  • 授予单位 University of Washington.;
  • 学科 Law.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2009
  • 页码 262 p.
  • 总页数 262
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 法律;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号