学会誌・資料 Journal

日本知財学会誌 第15巻第2号掲載

オキサリプラティヌム事件(特許権侵害差止請求控訴事件)
Oxaliplatinum Case (Appeal for Seeking an Injunctive Relief for Infringement of Patent Right)

島野 哲郎
Tetsuro Shimano

日本知財学会誌 Vol.15 No.2 p.41-49 (2018-12-20)
Journal of Intellectual Property Association of Japan Vol.15 No.2 p.41-49 (2018-12-20)

<要旨>
存続期間が延長された特許権の効力は,政令処分で定められた事項によって特定された「物」(医薬品)のみならず,これと医薬品として実質同一なものにも及び,実質同一か否かの判断は,特許発明の内容に基づき政令処分において定められた事項によって特定された「物」と被告製品との技術的特徴及び作用効果の同一性を比較検討して,当業者の技術常識を踏まえて判断すべきであるとした.本事件においては,更に,明細書や出願経過を参酌した上で,被告製品は特許発明の技術的範囲に属さないと判示した.
<Abstract>
The court concluded that a patent right whose term has been extended is valid not only for an “article” (medical and pharmaceutical products) defined by matters stipulated in Cabinet Order but also for those that are substantially identical as medical and pharmaceutical products, and it should be determined whether there is substantial identicalness or not there between by comparing, based on the content of the patented invention, the “article” defined by matters stipulated in Cabinet Order with the allegedly infringing product of the defendant to judge whether the technical features and operational effects of said article are the same as the technical features and operational effects of said product of the defendant while taking, into consideration, common general technical knowledge available to persons having ordinary skill in the art. In the subject case, the court referred to the specification and the prosecution history and concluded that said product of the defendant does not fall within the technical scope of the patented invention.

<キーワード>
延長,特許権の効力,実質同一,均等,禁反言
<Keywords>
Extension, efficacy of patent right, substantially identity, equivalent, estoppel