Petition申立て①Statement of position意見陳述②Immediateappeal即時抗告④Motion for challenge忌避の申立てImmediate appeal即時抗告④Plaintiff(Rights holder)権利者Defendant(Alleged infringer)被疑侵害者Court裁判所要件は厳格に設定・侵害行為の立証に必要・特許権侵害の蓋然性・他の手段では証拠が十分に集まらない・相手方の負担が過度にならないことSet rigorous requirements・Need to prove infringing actions・Probability of infringement・No other means of adequate evidence collection・Avoiding an excessive burden on the alleged infringerMeasures to protect condentiality秘密保護の仕組みCourt appoints a third person (expert)裁判所が査証人を指定・Expert ( enforcement ofcer)・Enters property, asks questions, asks to be shown documents, operates equipment, measures, conducts experiments・Plaintiff may not be present・専門家（＋執行官）・書類又は装置その他物の確認、作動、計測、実験等・申立人側の立会いは原則不可Comparative weighting of need to prove infringement and need to protect condentiality「侵害立証のための必要性」と「秘密保護の必要性」との比較衡量Inspection decision査証決定③Inspection conducted査証実施⑤Report creation報告書作成⑥Report disclosure報告書開示⑫Decision to ink out condential information秘密情報の黒塗りの判断⑩Immediate appeal即時抗告⑪Adoption of evidence証拠採用Immediate appeal即時抗告⑪Report sent報告書送達⑦Petition for inking out of condential information秘密情報の黒塗りの申立て⑧Content conrmed in camera by court aloneExceptionally, where deemed necessary by the court, the views of a party from the plaintiff’s side may be sought.However, content can only be disclosed to the plaintiff with the defendant’s approval.裁判所のみがインカメラにより内容を確認その例外として、裁判所が必要と認める時に限り、意見聴取ただし、申立人本人等への開示は相手方の同意が必要⑨Envisaged Inspection System査証制度のイメージFigure 2-3-2 2-3-2図JPO STATUS REPORT 2020113Part2 2019 Policy Outcomes 第2部 2019年の施策成果2Support Measures, aw Amendments, etc. 支援施策、法改正等
元のページ ../index.html#115