Article 1The purpose of this Act is to encourage to create devices by promoting the protection and the utilization of device in respect to the shape or structure of an article or to the combination of articles, and thereby to contribute to the development of industries.

Article 2(1)The term "device" as used in this Act refers to the creation of technical ideas utilizing the laws of nature.

(2)The term "registered utility model" as used in this Act means a device for which a utility model registration has been granted.

(3)The term "work" of a device in this Act means an act of manufacturing, using, assigning, leasing, exporting or importing, or offering for assignment or lease (including an act of displaying an article for the purpose of assignment or lease, the same applies hereinafter) an article relating to the device.

Article 2-2(1)A person undertaking procedures connected with the registration of a utility model, such as the filing of an application for utility model registration or a request of utility model registration (hereinafter simply referred to as "procedures") may make an amendment thereto only while the case is pending before the Japan Patent Office; provided, however, that the person may not make an amendment to the description, the scope of claims for a utility model registration, drawings or abstract accompanying the application or a document provided in Article 43, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act (Act No.121 of 1959) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 8, paragraph (4) or Article 11, paragraph (1) (including the case where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-2, paragraph (2) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) (including the case where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-3, paragraph (3) of the relevant Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1)) and Article 43-3, paragraph 3 of the relevant Act) after a period specified by an Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has lapsed.

(2)Any amendment to the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings pursuant to the provisions of the main clause of paragraph (1) must be made within the scope of matters stated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings originally accompanying the application.

(3)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), a corrected description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings accompanying a correction form with respect to a correction referred to in Article 14-2, paragraph (1) may not be amended.

(4)In the following cases, the Commissioner of the Patent Office may order that a procedural amendment be made within a reasonable, specified period of time:

(5)A written amendment (except in the case of a payment of registration fees or other fees), must be submitted for any procedures to be amended.

Article 2-3The Commissioner of the Patent Office may dismiss the procedures if the person ordered to make an amendment thereto under the provisions of Article 2-2, paragraph (4), Article 6-2 or Article 14-3 fails to make the amendment within a period designated under the relevant provisions.

Article 2-4(1)An association or foundation that is not a legal entity but for which a representative or an administrator has been appointed may, in its own name, undertake any of the following procedures:

(2)An association or foundation that is not a legal entity but for which a representative or an administrator has been appointed may, in its name, receive a request for retrial against the final and binding trial decision.

Article 2-5(1)The provisions of Articles 3 and 5 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the periods and dates provided in this Act.

(2)The provisions of Articles 7 through 9, 11 through 16 and 18-2 through 24 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to procedures.

(3)The provisions of Article 25 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to utility model rights and other rights relating to utility model registrations.

(4)The provisions of Article 26 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to utility model registrations.

Article 3(1)A person who created a device that relates to the shape or structure of an article or a combination of articles and is industrially applicable may be entitled to obtain a utility model registration for the relevant device, except the following devices:

(2)Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, a person may not obtain a utility model registration , if a person of ordinary skill in the art of the device would have easily created the device prior to the filing of the application for a utility model registration, based on any device listed in any of the items of the preceding paragraph.

Article 3-2If a device claimed in an application for utility model registration is identical with a device or invention (in the case if a person who created the device or invention is identical with the creator of the device claimed in the relevant application for utility model registration, excluding the device or invention) stated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or scope of claims for a patent or drawings (in the case of the written application in foreign language referred to in Article 36-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the document in foreign language referred to in Article 36-2, paragraph (1)) originally accompanying the application of another application for utility model registration or for patent which has been filed prior to the filing date of the relevant application for utility model registration and published after the filing of the relevant application for utility model registration in the utility model gazette under the provisions of Article 14, paragraph (3) (hereinafter the "utility model gazette") or in the patent gazette under the provisions of Article 66, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act stating matters listed in each of the items of the respective paragraph or for which the publication of the patent application has been effected, a utility model registration is not be granted for such device notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article; provided, however, this does not apply if, at the time of the filing of the relevant application for utility model registration, the applicant of the relevant application and the applicant of the other application for utility model registration or for patent are the same person.

Article 4Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, paragraph (1), any device that has a risk to be dangerous to public order, morals or public health may not be registered as a utility model.

Article 4-2(1)Any person who holds the right to obtain a utility model registration may grant a provisional non-exclusive license for the utility model right to be obtained based on the right to obtain a utility model registration to any third party within the scope of the matters indicated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings originally accompanying the application of the application for the utility model registration.

(2)When the establishment a utility model right has been registered for an application for utility model registration with respect to a provisional non-exclusive license under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, a non-exclusive license is deemed to have been granted for the utility model right to a person who holds the relevant provisional non-exclusive license within the scope specified by the contract granting the relevant provisional non-exclusive license.

(3)The provisions of Article 33, paragraphs (2) and (3), Article 34-3, paragraphs (4) through (6) and (8) through (10) and Article 34-5 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to provisional non-exclusive licenses.In this case, the phrases "Article 46, paragraph (1) with regard to an application for utility model registration pertaining to a provisional non-exclusive license under the provisions of Article 4-2, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act" in Article 34-3, paragraph (8) of the relevant act and "Article 46, paragraph (2)" in paragraph (9) of the relevant article are deemed to be replaced with "Article 10, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act with regard to a patent application pertaining to a provisional non-exclusive license under the provisions of Article 34-3, paragraph (1) or Article 34-2, paragraph (4)" and "Article 10, paragraph (2) of the Utility Model Act", respectively.

Article 5(1)Any person who intends to obtain a utility model registration must submit an application to the Commissioner of the Patent Office stating the following particulars:

(2)A description, scope of claims for a utility model registration, drawings and an abstract are to be accompanying the application.

(3)A description referred to in the preceding paragraph must state the following particulars:

(4)The detailed description of the device referred to in item (iii) of the preceding paragraph must be clear and sufficient so as to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art of the device to work the device as provided by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

(5)The scope of claims for a utility model registration referred to in paragraph (2) the applicant must state all particulars that the applicant finds to be necessary for identifying the device for which the applicant intends to obtain a utility model registration, separately for each claim. This does not preclude the device under one claim from being the same as the device under another claim.

(6)The description of the scope of claims for a utility model registration referred to in paragraph (2) must comply with each of the following items:

(7)The abstract referred to in paragraph (2) must summarize the device in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings, and any other matters specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

Article 6A single application for utility model registration may be filed for two or more devices provided that these devices fall under a group of devices recognized as fulfilling the requirements of the unity of devices based on their technical relationship specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

Article 6-2The Commissioner of the Patent Office may order the applicant to make an amendment to the description, scope of claims for a utility model or drawings accompanying an application, specifying a reasonable period of time, if the application for utility model request falls under any of the following items:

Article 7(1)If two or more applications for a utility model registration have been filed with regard to the same device on different dates, only the applicant that filed the application on the earliest date may be entitled to obtain a utility model registration for the claimed device.

(2)If two or more applications for utility model registration have been filed with regard to the same device on the same date, none of the applicants is not entitled to obtain a utility model registration for the claimed device.

(3)If a device claimed in an application for utility model registration and the invention claimed in a patent application are identical and the applications for the utility model registration and the patent application are filed on different dates, the applicant for the utility model registration may be entitled to obtain a utility model registration for the claimed device, only if the application for the utility model registration is filed before the patent applicant files a patent application.

(4)If an application for utility model registration or a patent application has been waived, withdrawn or dismissed, in applying the provisions of the preceding three paragraphs, the application for utility model registration or a patent application is deemed never to have been filed.

(5)If the examiner's decision or trial decision to reject a patent application has become final and binding, the patent application is to, for the purpose of paragraph (3), be deemed never to have been filed from the beginning; provided, however, that this does not apply to cases where the examiner's decision or trial decision to the effect that the patent application is to be rejected has become final and binding on the ground that the latter sentence of Article 39, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act is applicable to the relevant patent application.

(6)If no agreement is reached by consultations made under Article 39, paragraph (4) of the Patent Act or the consultations are unable to be held, the applicant for a utility model registration is not entitled to obtain a utility model registration for the device claimed.

Article 8(1)Except in the following cases, a person who intends to obtain a utility model registration may claim priority for a device claimed in the application for a utility model registration, based on a device stated in the description or scope of claims for a utility model registration or patent claim, or drawings (in the case if the earlier application was a written application in a foreign language referred to in Article 36-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the document in a foreign language referred to in paragraph (1) of the relevant Article) originally accompanying the application of an earlier application filed for a utility model registration or patent over which the relevant person holds the right to obtain (hereinafter referred to as "earlier application"): provided however, that if there is any person who holds a provisional exclusive license with regard to the earlier application, priority may be claimed only if the consent of the person is obtained at the time of filing the relevant application for the utility model registration:

(2)Among devices claimed in an application for utility model registration containing a priority claim under the provisions of paragraph (1), for those that are stated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or patent or drawings (in the case where the earlier application was an application written in foreign language referred to in Article 36-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the document in foreign language referred to in paragraph (1) of the relevant Article) originally accompanying the application of the earlier application on which the priority claim is based (in the case where the earlier application contains a priority claim under the provisions of the preceding paragraph or Article 41, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act (including the case where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-3, paragraph (3) of the relevant Act), or Article 43, paragraph (1) or 43-2, paragraph (1) or (2) of the Patent Act (including the case when these provisions apply mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) of the relevant Act), excluding any device stated in any documents (limited to those equivalent to the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or patent or drawings) submitted at the time of the filing of the application on which the priority claim in the earlier application is based), the relevant application for utility model registration is deemed to have been filed at the time when the earlier application was filed with respect to the application of the provisions of Article 3, the main clause of Article 3-2, Article 7, paragraphs (1) through (3), Article 30, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1), Article 17, Articles 69, paragraph (2), item (ii) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 26, Articles 79 and 81, Article 82, paragraph (1), and Articles 39, paragraphs (3) and (4) and Article 72 of the Patent Act, Article 26, Article 31, paragraph (2) and Article 32, paragraph (2) of the Design Act (Act No. 125 of 1959), Article 29, Article 33-2, paragraph (3) and Article 33-3, paragraph (3) of the Trademark Act (Act No. 127 of 1959) (including if these provisions apply mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 68, paragraph (3) of the Trademark Act) of the Trademark Act.

(3)Among devices stated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or drawings originally accompanying the application in an application for utility model registration containing a priority claim under the provisions of paragraph (1), for those that are stated in the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or claims or drawings (in the case when the earlier application was an application written in foreign language referred to in Article 36-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the document in foreign language referred to in paragraph (1) of the relevant Article) originally accompanying the application of the earlier application on which the priority claim is based (in the case where the relevant earlier application contains a priority claim under the provisions of the preceding paragraph or Article 41, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act, Article 43-2, paragraph 1 (including the case where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-3, paragraph (3) of the relevant Act) or Article 43-3, paragraph (1) or (2) of the Patent Act (including the case where these provisions apply mutatis mutandis under Article 11, paragraph (1) of this Act), excluding any device stated in any documents (limited to those equivalent to the description, scope of claims for a utility model registration or patent or drawings) submitted at the time of the filing of the application on which the priority claim in the earlier application is based), the utility model gazette with regard to the earlier application or the publication of the earlier application is deemed to have been issued or effected at the time when the utility model gazette with regard to the relevant application for utility model registration was issued so as to apply the provisions of the main clause of Article 3-2 of the Utility Model Act or Article 29-2 of the Patent Act.

(4)A person seeking a priority claim under the provisions of paragraph (1) must submit to the Commissioner of the Patent Office a document stating the effect thereof and the indication of the earlier application within a priority claim specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

Article 9(1)An earlier application on which a priority claim is based under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) is deemed to have been withdrawn when a period specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has lapsed from the filing date of the relevant earlier application; provided, however, that this does not apply to the case where an earlier application has been abandoned, withdrawn or dismissed, if the examiner's decision or trial decision on the relevant earlier application has become final and binding with regard to the relevant application, where the establishment of the relevant earlier application provided in Article 14, paragraph (2) has been registered or where all of the claims of priority based on the relevant earlier application have been withdrawn.

(2)An applicant filing for an application for a utility model registration containing a priority claim under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) may not withdraw the priority claim after a period specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has lapsed from the filing date of the earlier application.

(3)If an application for a utility model registration containing a priority claim under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (1) is withdrawn within a period specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry from the filing date of the earlier application, the relevant priority claim is deemed to be withdrawn simultaneously.

Article 10(1)A patent applicant may convert that patent application (other than one that has been filed based on a utility model registration under the provisions of Article 46-2, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act (this includes patent applications deemed to have been filed at the time of the filing of the original patent application under the provisions of Article 44, paragraph (2) of the relevant Act (including the case where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 46, paragraph (6) of the relevant Act))) into an application for a utility model registration; provided, however, that this does not apply after three months from the date on which the certified copy of the examiner's initial decision to the effect that the patent application to be rejected was served or once nine years and six months have passed since the filing date of the patent application.

(2)An applicant for design registration may convert that application for design registration (other than a design registration deemed, pursuant to the provisions of Article 10-2, paragraph (2) of the Design Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 13, paragraph (6) of the Design Act, to have been filed at the time of the original patent application which was filed based on an application for utility model registration under the provisions of Article 46-2, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act (including applications for a design registration deemed to have been filed at the time of the filing of the original application for design registration under the provisions of Article 10-2, paragraph (2) of the Design Act)) into an application for a utility model registration; provided, however, that this does not apply after three months from the date the certified copy of the examiner's initial decision to the effect that the application for a design registration to be rejected, has been served or nine years and six months from the filing date of the application for design registration have lapsed.

(3)If an application is converted under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, the application for utility model registration is deemed to have been filed at the time that the patent application or the application for design registration was filed; provided, however, that this does not apply if the purpose of the application of the provisions of Article 3-2 of this Act or Article 29-2 of the Patent Act is an application for a utility model registration that falls under another application for a utility model registration provided in Article 3-2 of this Act or an application for a utility model registration provided in Article 29-2 of the Patent Act, and the application of the provisions of Article 30, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1).

(4)If an application is converted under the provisions of paragraph (1) or (2), for the purpose of the application of the provisions of Article 43, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) (including cases when it is applied mutatis mutandis under Article 43-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) (including cases when it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-3, paragraph (3) of the relevant Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1)) and Article 43-3, paragraph (3)), the term "within one year and four months from the earliest of the following dates" in Article 43, paragraph (2) is replaced with "within one year and four months from the earliest of the following dates or three months from the filing date of the application for utility model registration with respect to the conversion of an application under the provisions of Article 10, paragraph (1) or (2) of the Utility Model Act, whichever comes later."

(5)If an application is converted as under the provisions of paragraph (1) or (2), the patent application or the application for design registration is deemed to have been withdrawn.

(6)If the period prescribed in Article 121, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act is extended pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 of the relevant Act, the three-month period provided in the proviso to paragraph (1) is deemed to have been extended only for that extended period.

(7)If the period prescribed in Article 46, paragraph (1) of the Design Act is extended pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 68, paragraph (1) of the Design Act, the three-month period provided in the proviso to paragraph (2) is deemed to have been extended, but only for the length of time that the period prescribed in Article 46, paragraph (1) of the Design Act is extended.

(8)If an application is converted as provided in paragraph (1), any papers or documents that have been submitted in connection with the original patent application and that are required to be submitted in connection with a new application for utility model registration under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (4) of this Act or Article 30, paragraph (3) or Article 43, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) (including cases where these provisions apply mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-2, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1) (including cases where it is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 43-3, paragraph 3 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph 1) and Article 43-3, paragraph 3) is deemed to have been submitted to the Commissioner of the Patent Office simultaneously along with the new application for a utility model application.

(9)If a person who holds a provisional exclusive license in connection with a patent application, the patent applicant may only convert that application as under paragraph (1) with the consent of that person.

(10)The provisions of paragraph (8) apply mutatis mutandis to the conversion of an application as under the provisions of paragraph (2).

Article 11(1)The provisions of Article 30 (Exception to the Lack of Novelty of Invention), Article 38 (Joint Applications) and Articles 43 and 44 (Procedure for a Priority Claim under the Paris Convention and Division of Patent Applications) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to applications for utility model registration.

(2)The provisions of Article 33 and Article 34, paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) through (7) (Right to Obtain a Patent) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the right to obtain a utility model registration.

(3)The provisions of Article 35 (excluding the part with respect to provisional exclusive licenses) (Inventions by Employees) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to devices created by employees, corporate officers of corporations, or national or local public officers.

Article 12(1)Any person may file a request with the Commissioner of the Patent Office with respect to an application for utility model registration or a utility model registration,for a technical opinion about the device claimed in that application or about the registered utility model, as concerns what is provided in the provisions of Article 3, paragraph (1), item (iii) and Article 3, paragraph (2) (limited to its application based on the device as set forth in Article 3, paragraph (1), item (iii)), Article 3-2, and Article 7, paragraphs (1) through (3) and (6) (hereinafter referred to as "technical opinion about a utility model"). Similarly, in respect of applications or registered utility models that contain two or more claims, such a request may be filed for each individual claim.

(2)A request as under the provisions of the preceding paragraph may be filed even after the lapse of the utility model; provided, however, that this does not apply if the utility model is invalidated in a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model.

(3)Notwithstanding the preceding two paragraphs, a request as under the provisions of paragraph (1) may not be filed subsequent to the filing of a patent application under Article 46-2, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act which is based on that utility model registration.

(4)When a request as under the provisions of paragraph (1) is filed, the Commissioner of the Patent Office must have an examiner to prepare a written report giving a technical opinion about a utility model (hereinafter referred to as a "written technical opinion about a utility model").

(5)The provisions of Article 47, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the preparation of a written technical opinion about a utility model.

(6)A request as under the provisions of paragraph (1) may not be withdrawn.

(7)If after the filing of a request as under the provisions of paragraph (1) was filed by a person that is neither the applicant for the utility model registration nor the utility model holder, a patent application as under the provisions of Article 46-2, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act is filed based on the utility model registration to which the request pertains (this includes a utility model registration linked to an application for utility model registration to which a request as under the provisions of paragraph (1) pertains), the request is deemed not to have been filed. In such a case, the Commissioner of the Patent Office must notify the person filing the request of this.

Article 13(1)If a request for technical opinion about a utility model is filed prior to publication of the utility model gazette, the Commissioner of the Patent Office must publish the indication of this in the utility model gazette either at the time of publication of the relevant utility model gazette or thereafter without delay, and when such a request is filed after the publication of the utility model gazette, without delay after the publication of the utility model gazette.

(2)If a request for a technical opinion about a utility model is filed by a person that is neither the person applying for a utility model registration nor the utility model holder, the Commissioner of the Patent Office must notify the person applying for the utility model registration or the utility model holder of this.

(3)Once a written technical opinion about a utility model is prepared, the Commissioner of the Patent Office must serve a certified copy on the requester if the requester is either the person applying for the utility model registration or the utility model holder and must serve a copy of the written technical opinion about a utility model on the person applying for the utility model registration or the utility model holder, if the requester is neither the person applying for the utility model registration nor the utility model holder.

Article 37(1)If a utility model registration falls under one of the following items, a demand may be filed for trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model.In this case, if there are two or more claims, a request for trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model may be filed for each claim.

(2)Any person may file a demand for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model; provided, however, that if a demand is filed for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model on the grounds that the utility model registration falls under item (ii) of the preceding paragraph (limited to a case in which the utility model registration has been obtained in violation of Article 38 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 11, paragraph (1)) or item (v) of the preceding paragraph, only a person with the right to obtain a utility model registration for the device to which the utility model registration pertains may file

(3)A demand for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model may be filed even after the forfeiture of the utility model.

(4)If a demand is filed for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model, the chief administrative judge must notify the exclusive licensee under the utility model of this and notify other persons with registered rights under the utility model of the same.

Article 38(1)A person demanding a trial must submit a written demand stating the following to the Commissioner of the Patent Office:

(2)In the grounds for the demand that are set forth in item (iii) of the preceding paragraph, the facts on that are the basis for invalidating the utility model registration must be concretely identified, and the relationship of each fact that needs to be proved to the evidence must be stated.

Article 38-2(1)The amendment of a written demand submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) of the preceding Article must not change the outline thereof; provided, however, that this does not apply if allowed by the chief administrative judge as under the provisions of the following paragraph.

(2)If the amendment of the grounds for the demand set forth in Article 38, paragraph (1), item (iii) changes the outline thereof, the chief administrative judge may rule to allow the amendment will unreasonably delay of the proceedings and that the circumstances fall under one of the following items:

(3)Allowances for an amendment as referred to in the preceding paragraph may not be made if the procedural amendment form for that amendment is submitted prior to the service of a copy of the written demand under the provisions of Article 39, paragraph (1).

(4)No appeal may be filed against the ruling referred to in paragraph (2) or inaction thereof.

Article 39(1)Once a demand for trial or appeal is filed, the chief administrative judge must serve a copy of the written demand on the respondent and give the respondent an opportunity to submit a written answer within a reasonable, specified period of time.

(2)If the chief administrative judge allows the amendment of a written demand pursuant to the provisions of Article 38-2, paragraph (2), the judge must serve a copy of the procedural form for that amendment on the respondent, and give the respondent an opportunity to submit a written answer within a reasonable, specified period of time; provided, however, that this does not apply if there are special circumstances due to which there is found to be no need to give the respondent an opportunity to submit a written answer.

(3)Once the chief administrative judge accepts a written answer as provided in paragraph (1) or the main clause of the preceding paragraph, or once a correction as referred to in Article 14-2, paragraph (1) or (7) has been made while a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model is pending at the Japan Patent Office, the chief trial examiner must serve a copy thereof on the demandant.

(4)The chief administrative judge may question the parties and the intervenors in connection with the trial or appeal.

(5)If a patent application under the provisions of Article 46-2, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act is filed based on the utility model registration after a demand is filed for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model , the chief administrative judge must notify the demandant and the intervenors of this.

Article 39-2(1)A demand for trial or appeal may be withdrawn up until such time as the trial decision becomes final and binding.

(2)Once the written answer referred to in Article 39, paragraph (1) has been submitted, the demand for trial or appeal may not be withdrawn without the consent of the adverse party.

(3)Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, if the demandant receives a notice under the provisions of Article 39, paragraph (5), the demandant may withdraw the demand for trial or appeal but only within 30 days from the date on which the demandant received the notice.

(4)The provisions of Article 4 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the period provided for in the preceding paragraph.In this case, the term "The Commissioner of the Patent Office" in that Article is deemed to be replaced with "the chief administrative judge".

(5)Notwithstanding the provisions provided in paragraph (3), if the demandant is unable to withdraw the demand for trial or appeal within the period provided for in that paragraph, due to reasons beyond the demandant's control, the demandant may, file the demand within 14 days (or within two months, if the demandant is an overseas resident) from the date on which those reasons fail to apply, but no later than six months after the end of the aforementioned period.

(6)If a demand for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model is filed in respect of two or more claims in a utility model registration that covers two or more claims, the demand may be withdrawn on a claim-by-claim basis.

Article 40(1)If it is found to be necessary during a trial or appeal, the trial or appeal proceedings may be suspended until a trial decision from another trial or appeal before the Japan Patent Office becomes final and binding or until civil litigation proceedings conclude.

(2)If a civil action has been instituted or a motion has been filed for an order of provisional seizure or an order of provisional disposition and the civil court finds it to be necessary, the court may suspend civil litigation proceedings until a trial decision by the Japan Patent Office becomes final and binding.

(3)The court is to notify the Commissioner of the Patent Office if a civil action is instituted with respect to the infringement of a utility model or an exclusive license. It must also do this once such litigation proceedings conclude.

(4)If the Commissioner of the Patent Office is notified as provided in the preceding paragraph, the commissioner is to notify the civil court of whether a demand for trial or appeal has been filed with the Japan Patent Office with regard to that utility model. The commissioner must also do this once the Japan Patent Office issues a ruling dismissing the written demand for such a trial or appeal, or renders the trial decision or if the demand for such a trial or appeal is withdrawn.

(5)If the civil court is notified pursuant to the preceding paragraph that a demand for a trial or appeal has been filed with regard to the relevant utility model, it must notify the Commissioner of the Patent Office if a document containing an allegation or defense as under Article 104-3, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 30 has already been submitted in the litigation prior to that notice and must notify the commissioner if the document is submitted for the first time after that notice.

(6)If the Commissioner of the Patent Office is notified as provided in the preceding paragraph, the commissioner may request the court to deliver a copy of any documentary record of the court proceedings that the administrative judge finds to be necessary for the trial or appeal with the Japan Patent Office.

Article 41The provisions of Articles 125, 132 through 133-2, 135 through 154, Article 156, paragraphs (1), (3) and (4), Articles 157, 167 and 167-2, Article 169, paragraphs (1), (2), (5) and (6), and Article 170 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to trials and appeals.In this case, the term "In a trial other than a trial for patent invalidation, when the case" in Article 156, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "When a case".

Article 42(1)A party or an intervenor may demand a retrial to overturn a final and binding trial decision.

(2)The provisions of Articles 338, paragraphs (1) and (2) and Article 339 (Grounds for retrial) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Act No109 of 1996) apply mutatis mutandis to a demand for a retrial as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Article 43(1)Where a demandant and respondent in a trial or appeal before the Japan Patent Office have conspired to bring about a the trial decision with the aim of harming the rights or interests of any third party, the third party may demand a retrial to overturn the final and binding trial decision.

(2)A demand for a retrial referred to in the preceding paragraph must be filed with the demandant and the respondent from the trial or appeal as the joint respondents.

Article 44(1)If a utility model under an invalidated utility model registration is restored on retrial, the utility model has no effect against an article covered by the registered utility model that was imported into or manufactured or acquired within Japan in good faith, after the trial decision became final and binding and before the demand for a retrial was registered.

(2)If the utility model to which an invalidated utility model registration pertains is restored on retrial, the utility model has no effect against the following actions as performed after the trial decision became final and binding and before the demand for a retrial was registered:

Article 45(1)Articles 173 (Period for Demanding a Retrial), 174, paragraphs (3) and (5) (Mutatis Mutandis Application of Provisions on Trials and Appeals), and 176 (Non-exclusive License based on the Working of the Invention Prior to the Registration of the Request for a Retrial) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to retrials.In this case, in Article 174, paragraph (3) of the relevant Act, the phrase "Article 131, paragraph (1), the main clause of Article 131-2, paragraph (1)," "Article 134, paragraphs (1), (3) and (4)" and "and Article 168" is deemed to be replaced with "Article 38, paragraph (1), the main clause of Article 38-2", "Article 39, paragraphs (1), (3) and (4) of the Utility Model Act," and "Article 167-2, Article 40 of the Utility Model Act," respectively.

(2)The provisions of Article 4 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the period provided for in Article 173, paragraph (1) of the relevant Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to the preceding paragraph.

Article 46Deleted

Article 47(1)The Tokyo High Court has exclusive jurisdiction over any action seeking to overturn a trial decision or a ruling dismissing a written request for a trial or appeal, or a retrial.

(2)The provisions of Article 178, paragraphs (2) through (6) (Statute of Limitations for Filing an Action), Articles 179 through 182-2 (The Proper Defendant; Notice of the Filing of an Action etc.; Opinion of the Commissioner of the Patent Office in Litigation Seeking to Overturn a Trial Decision; Overturning a Trial Decision or Ruling; Delivery of the Original Copy of the Judicial Decision; Composition of a Panel) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to an action as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Article 48(1)If a person receiving an award as referred to in Article 21, paragraph (2), Article 22, paragraph (3) or (4), or Article 23, paragraph (2) is dissatisfied with the amount of consideration determined in the award, that person may institute an action demanding an increase or decrease in that amount.

(2)The provisions of Articles 183, paragraph (2) (Statute of Limitations for Filing an Action) and Article 184 (The Proper Defendant) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to actions referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Article 48-2Deleted

Article 48-3(1)An international application (limited only to an application for utility model registration) to which an international filing date is accorded based on the provisions of Article 11 (1), Article 11 (2) (b) or Article 14 (2) of the Patent Cooperation Treaty signed in Washington on June 19, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the "Treaty" in this Chapter) and which includes Japan as a designated State under Article 4 (1) (ii) of the Treaty is deemed to be an application for a utility model registration filed on the relevant international filing date.

(2)The provisions of Article 184-3, paragraph (2) (The Filing of a Patent Application Through an International Application) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the filing of an international application that has been deemed to be an application for utility model registration pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph (hereinafter referred to as "international application for utility model registration").

Article 48-4(1)An applicant filing an international application for utility model registration in a foreign language (hereinafter referred to as "Foreign Language Application for Utility Model Registration") must submit Japanese translations of the description, claims, drawings (but only the descriptive text in the drawings, hereinafter the same applies in this Article), and the abstract, provided for in Article 3 (2) of the Treaty, as they stand on the international filing date provided for in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article (hereinafter referred to as the "international filing date") to the Commissioner of the Patent Office, within two years and six months (hereinafter referred to as the "time limit for the submission of national documents") from the priority date referred to in Article 2 (xi) of the Treaty (hereinafter referred to as the "priority date") to two years and six months therefrom; provided, however, that the applicant filing a foreign language application for utility model registration that has submitted the document provided for in paragraph (1) of the following Article between two months before the end of the time limit for submitting national documents and the end of that time limit (unless the translations have been submitted prior to the submission of those documents) may submit the relevant translations within two months from the date of submission of those documents (hereinafter referred to as the "special time limit for the submission of translations").

(2)In a case as referred to in the preceding paragraph, if the applicant filing the foreign language application for utility model registration makes an amendment by virtue of Article 19 (1) of the Treaty, in lieu of submitting a translation of the claims as provided in the preceding paragraph, the applicant may submit a translation of the amended claims.

(3)If the translation of the description provided for in paragraph (1) and the translation of the claims provided for in the preceding two paragraphs (hereinafter referred to as the "translations of the description, etc.") are not been submitted within the time limit for submitting national documents (or, if the application is a foreign language application for utility model registration as referred to in the proviso to paragraph (1), within the special time limit for submitting translations; hereinafter the same applies in this Article), the international application for utility model registration is deemed to be withdrawn.

(4)If an applicant filing an international application for utility model registration that is deemed to be withdrawn pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, has a legitimate reason for having not been able to submit the translation of the description, etc., within the time limit for submitting national documents, the applicant may submit the translation of the description, etc. and the translations of the drawings and the abstract provided in paragraph (1) to the Commissioner of the Patent Office within two months after the date on which the reasons cease to exist, but not later than one year after the end of the time limit for submitting national documents.

(5)Translations submitted under the provisions of the preceding paragraph are deemed to have been submitted to the Commissioner of the Patent Office at the time just before the time limit for the submitting national documents expires.

(6)If any amendment by virtue on the provisions of Article 19 (1) of the Treaty is made, the applicant submitting the translation of the claims provided for in paragraph (1) may further submit a Japanese translation of the amended claims no later than the date on which the time limit for submitting national documents expires (or, if the applicant makes a request under the provisions of Article 23 (2) or Article 40 (2) of the Treaty within the time limit for submitting national documents (hereinafter referred to as "request for national processing"), the time of filing the request for national processing, (hereinafter referred to as "standard time for national processing")).

(7)The provisions of the main clause of Article 184-7, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis if a translation provided for in paragraph (2) or the preceding paragraph is not submitted.

Article 48-5(1)An applicant filing an international application for utility model registration must submit a document to the Commissioner of the Patent Office within the time limit for submitting national documents, stating the following particulars:

(2)In the following cases, the Commissioner of the Patent Office may order that a procedural amendment be made within a reasonable, specified period of time:

(3)The provisions of Article 184-5, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to an amendment that is based on an order under the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

(4)An applicant filing an international application for utility model registration may not file a request for national processing, with respect to an international application for utility model registration filed in a Japanese language (hereinafter referred to as a "Japanese language application for utility model registration" until after undertaking the procedure under paragraph (1); may not file a request for national processing with respect to the relevant foreign language application for utility model registration until after undertaking procedures under the provisions of paragraph (1) and Article 48-4; and may not file a request for national processing with respect to either such application until after paying the registration fees that must be paid pursuant to Article 32, paragraph (1) and the fees that must be paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2).

Article 48-6(1)The request in an international application for utility model registration as of the international filing date is deemed to be a request submitted pursuant to Article 5, paragraph (1).

(2)The description, as of the international filing date, of a Japanese language application for utility model registration, or the translation of the description, as of the international filing date of a foreign language application for utility model registration is deemed to be the description submitted with the request pursuant to Article 5, paragraph (2); the utility model registration claims as of the international filing date, of a Japanese language application for utility model registration or the translation of the claims, as of the international filing date, of a foreign language application for utility model registration are deemed to be the claims submitted with the request pursuant to that paragraph: the drawings, as of the international filing date, of a Japanese language application for utility model registration, or the drawings (other than the descriptive text in the drawings) and the translation of the descriptive text in the drawings as of the international filing date, of a foreign language application for utility model registration are deemed to be the drawings, submitted with the request pursuant to that paragraph; are deemed to be the drawings submitted with the request pursuant to that paragraph; and the abstract of the Japanese language application for utility model registration or the translation of the abstract of a foreign language application for utility model registration is deemed to be the abstract submitted with the request pursuant to that paragraph.

(3)Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, if a translation of the claims as amended by virtue of Article 19 (1) of the Treaty is submitted pursuant to Article 48-4, paragraph (2) or (6), the translation of the amended claims is deemed to be the utility model registration claims submitted with the request pursuant to Article 5, paragraph (2).

Article 48-7(1)If an international application for utility model registration does not include a drawing,, the applicant must submit one to the Commissioner of the Patent Office within the standard time for national processing.

(2)If a drawing as under the provisions of the preceding paragraph is not submitted within the standard time for national processing, the Commissioner of the Patent Office may order the applicant filing the international application for utility model registration to submit one within a reasonable period of time.

(3)If a person ordered to submit a drawing pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph does not submit one within the period of time that the Commissioner of the Patent Office specifies pursuant to that paragraph, the commissioner may dismiss the relevant international application for utility model registration.

(4)The submission of a drawing pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) or based on the order under the provisions of paragraph (2) (if a brief description of the drawing is submitted with it, this means the submission of the drawing description) is deemed to be a procedural amendment under the provisions of Article 2-2, paragraph (1). The provisions of the proviso to Article 2-2, paragraph (1) does not apply in such a case.

Article 48-8(1)The provisions of the proviso to Article 2-2, paragraph (1) does not apply to an amendment that is, pursuant to the provisions of Article 184-7, paragraph (2) and Article 184-8, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 48-15, paragraph (1), to be an amendment under the provisions of Article 2-2, paragraph (1).

(2)The provisions of the proviso to Article 2-2, paragraph (1) does not apply to the amendment of an international application for utility model registration by virtue of Article 28 (1) or Article 41 (1) of the Treaty.

(3)With regard to the allowable scope of amendment to the description, utility model registration claims or drawings in a foreign language application for utility model registration, the phrase "the description, utility model registration claims, or drawings originally accompanying the request" in Article 2-2, paragraph (2) is deemed to be replaced with "the description, claims, or drawings in the international application as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1)."

(4)The provisions of Article 184-12, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the amendment of an international application for utility model registration based on the main clause of Article 2-2, paragraph (1) or by virtue of Article 28 (1) or Article 41 (1) of the Treaty.In this case, the term "Article 195, paragraph (2)" in Article 184-12, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act is deemed to be replaced with "registration fees that must be paid pursuant to the provisions of Article 32, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act and Article 54, paragraph (2) of the relevant Act," and the phrase "has been paid, and the standard time for national processing has passed" is deemed to be replaced with "has been paid."

Article 48-9In applying the provisions of Article 3-2, to a case in which another application for utility model registration as provided in Article 3-2 or a patent application as provided in that Article is an international application for utility model registration or an international patent application as referred to in Article 184-3, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the phrase " in another application for utility model registration or for patent" in Article 3-2 is deemed to be replaced with "in another application for utility model registration or in a patent application (other than one that is a foreign language application for utility model registration as referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act or a foreign language patent application as referred to in Article 184-4, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act, and which is deemed to have been withdrawn pursuant to Article 48-4, paragraph (3) of the Utility Model Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act"; the phrase "the issuance or" is deemed to be replaced with "the issuance," the term "or the publication of the patent application" is deemed to be replaced with "or the publication of the patent application, or the international publication provided in Article 21 of the Patent Cooperation Treaty signed in Washington on June 19, 1970," and the term "the description, claims for a utility model registration or drawings originally accompanying the written application" is deemed to be replaced with "the description, claims,, or drawings in an international application, as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) of this Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act."

Article 48-10(1)The provisions of the proviso to Article 8, paragraph (1), Article 8, paragraph (4) and Article 9, paragraph (2) do not apply to an international application for utility model registration.

(2)In applying the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (3) to a Japanese language application for utility model registration, the phrase "at the time that the application for utility model registration is published in the gazette in which the utility model appears " in Article 8, paragraph (3) is deemed to be replaced with " at time that the application for the utility model registration is published in the gazette in which the utility model appears or at the time that the international publication prescribed in Article 21 of the Patent Cooperation Treaty done at Washington on June 19, 1970 is effected".

(3)In applying the provisions of Article 8, paragraph (3) to foreign language application for utility model registration, the phrase "in the description, utility model registration claims, or drawings originally accompanying the request in an application for utility model registration claiming priority as under Article 8, paragraph (3) is deemed to be replaced with "in the description, claims or drawings in an international application claiming priority as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1)," and the phrase "at the time that the application for the utility model registration is published in the utility model gazette in which the utility model appears" is deemed to be replaced with "at the time that the application for the utility model registration is published in the utility model gazette or at the time that the international publication prescribed in Article 21 of the Patent Cooperation Treaty done at Washington on June 19, 1970 is effected".

(4)In applying the provisions of Articles 8, paragraphs (1) through (3) and Article 9, paragraph (1), if an earlier application referred to in Article 8, paragraph (1) of this Act is an international application for a utility model registration or an international patent application as referred to in Article 184-3, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act, the phrase "the description, utility model registration claims, patent claims, or drawings originally accompanying the request" in Articles 8, paragraphs (1) and (2) is deemed to be replaced with "the description, claims, or drawings in an international application, as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act," the phrase "the description, utility model registration claims, patent claims, or drawings originally accompanying the request in the earlier application" in Article 8, paragraph (3) is deemed to be replaced with "the description, claims, or drawings in an international application, as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) of this Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act," the phrase "publication of unexamined application" in Article 8, paragraph (3) is deemed to be replaced with "the international publication provided in Article 21 of the Patent Cooperation Treaty done at Washington on June 19, 1970," and the phrase "when a period specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has lapsed from the application date" in Article 9, paragraph (1) is deemed to be replaced with "at the standard time for national processing standard time referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (6) of this Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (6) of the Patent Act or at the time when a period specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has passed from the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) of this Act or Article 184-4, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act, whichever is later."

Article 48-11If an international application that is deemed to be a patent application pursuant to Article 184-3, paragraph (1) or Article 184-20, paragraph (4) of the Patent Act is a Japanese language patent application for utility model registration until after the procedure under Article 184-5, paragraph (1) of that Act has been undertaken; if such an international application is a foreign language application as referred to in Article 184-4, paragraph (1), it may not be converted until the procedures that paragraph, paragraph (4) of that Article, or Article 184-5, paragraph (1) of that Act has been undertaken; and in any case, it may not be converted into an application for utility model registration until after the fees that must be paid pursuant to Article 195,, paragraph (2) of that Act have been paid (or, if the international application is deemed to be a patent application pursuant to Article 184-20, paragraph (4) of that Act, until after the ruling provided for in Articles 184-20, paragraph (4) of that Act, until after the ruling provided for in Article 184-20, paragraph (4)).

Article 48-12With respect to the payment of registration fees in connection with an international application for utility model registration for all years from the first to the third year, the phrase "at the same time of the filing of the application for the utility model registration" in Article 32, paragraph (1) is deemed to be replaced with "within the time limit for the submitting national documents provided as provided in Article 48-4, paragraph (1) (if a request for national processing as prescribed in Article 48-4, paragraph (6) is filed, this means by the time of the request for national processing)."

Article 48-13In respect of a request for a technical opinion about a utility model in connection with an international application for utility model registration, the term "Any person" in Article 12, paragraph (1) is deemed to be replaced with "after the standard time for national processing as prescribed in Article 48-4, paragraph (6) has passed, any person."

Article 48-13-2With respect to a correction under the provisions of Article 14-2, paragraph (1) to a foreign language application for utility model registration, the phrase "the description, utility model registration or drawings accompanying the request" in Article 14-2, paragraph (3) is deemed to be replaced with "the description, claims or drawings in the international application, as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1)."

Article 48-14In respect of a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model in connection with a foreign language application for utility model registration, the phrase "the utility model registration has been granted on an application for utility model registration with an amendment that does not comply with the requirements as stipulated in Article 2-2, paragraph (2)" in Article 37, paragraph (1), item (i) is deemed to be replaced with "the matter indicated in the description, utility model registration claims or drawings accompanying the request for a utility model registration in a foreign model registration as referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1), is not within the scope of the matter indicated in the description, claims, or drawings in the international application, as of the international filing date referred to in Article 48-4, paragraph (1)".

Article 48-15(1)Provisions of Articles 184-7 (Amendments based on Article 19 of the Treaty Japanese Language Patent Application) and Article 184-8, paragraphs (1) through (3) (Amendment under Article 34 of the Treaty) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the amendment of an international application for utility model registration based on the Treaty.In this case, the term "Article 17-2, paragraph (1)" in Articles 184-7, paragraph (2) and 184-8, paragraph (2) is deemed to be replaced with "Article 2-2. paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act."

(2)The provisions of Article 184-11 (Special Provisions on Patent Administrators for Overseas Residents) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to procedures connected with international applications for utility model registration.

(3)The provisions of Articles 184-9, paragraph (6) and 184-14 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to international applications for utility model registration.

Article 48-16(1)If a refusal as provided in Article 25 (1)(a) of the Treaty or a declaration as provided in Article 25 (1) (a) or (b) of the Treaty has been issued by a receiving Office referred to in Article 2 (xv) of the Treaty, or if a finding as provided in Article 25 (1) (a) of the Treaty has been made by the International Bureau referred to in Article 2 (xix) of the Treaty in relation to an international application referred to in Article 2 (vii) of the Treaty (meaning an application for utility model registration only) that lists Japan as a designated State as referred to in Article 4 (1)(ii) of the Treaty, an applicant filing an international application as referred to in Article 2 (vii) of the Treaty may petition the Commissioner of the Patent Office, pursuant to Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, to make the decision provided for in Article 25 (2)(a) of the Treaty within the time frame specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

(2)A person filing a petition as referred to in the preceding paragraph in connection with an international application that has been filed in a foreign language must submit Japanese translations of the description, claims, drawings (but only the descriptive text in the drawings), and abstract and of other documents linked with the international application that are specified by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry to the Commissioner of the Patent Office at the time of the petition.

(3)Upon the filing of a petition as referred to in paragraph (1), the Commissioner of the Patent Office must decide whether the refusal, declaration or finding to which the petition pertains is justified in the light of the provisions of the Treaty and based on the Regulations on the Patent Cooperation Treaty.

(4)If the Commissioner of the Patent Office, pursuant to the preceding paragraph, decides that the refusal, declaration or finding, referred to in that paragraph was not justified in the light of the provisions of the Treaty and Regulations based on the Patent Cooperation Treaty, the international application subject to that decision is deemed to be an application for a utility model registration filed on the day that it is found would have been the international filing date if no such refusal, declaration, or finding had been made with respect to the international application.

(5)The provisions of Article 48-6, paragraphs (1) and (2), Article 48-7, Article 48-8, paragraph (3), Article 48-9, Article 48-10, paragraphs (1), (3) and (4), and Articles 48-12 through 48-14 of the Utility Model Act and Article 184-3, paragraph (2), Article 184-9, paragraph (6), Article 184-12, paragraph (1) and Article 184-14 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to international applications that are deemed to be an application for utility model registration under the provisions of the preceding paragraph.In this case, the technical replacement of the necessary terms for the mutatis mutandis application of the relevant provisions is specified by Cabinet Order.

Article 49(1)The following particulars are registered in the utility model register maintained at the Japan Patent Office:

(2)The utility model register may be prepared, in whole or in part, on magnetic tape. (this includes any other medium onto which a fixed set of information can be securely recorded using a means equivalent to that used for recording onto magnetic tape; the same applies hereinafter).

(3)The particulars of registration that need to be stipulated beyond what is prescribed in this Act are provided for by Cabinet Order.

Article 50(1)The Commissioner of the Patent Office issues a certificate of utility model registration to the holder of the utility model when the registration is establishing the utility model and if a correction as referred to in Article 14-2, paragraph (1) is made, or if the transfer of the utility model right has been registered based on a request made under the provisions of Article 17-2, paragraph (1).

(2)The re-issuance of a certificate of utility model registration is provided by Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

Article 50-2In applying the provisions of Article 12, paragraph (2), Article 14-2, paragraph (8) of the Utility Model Act, Article 97, paragraph (1) or Article 98, paragraph (1), item (i) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 26 of this Act, Article 34, paragraph (1), item (iii), Article 37, paragraph (3), Article 125 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 41 of this Act, Article 132, paragraph (1) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis in Article 174, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 41 or Article 45, paragraph (1) of this Act, Article 44 of this Act, Article 176 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 45, paragraph (1) of this Act, Article 49, paragraph (1), item (i) of this Act, or Article 193, paragraph (2), item (v) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 53, paragraph (2) of this Act to a utility model registration or a utility model with tow ore more claims, the utility model registration is deemed to have been granted, or the utility model is deemed to exist, on a claim-by-claim basis.

Article 51The utility model holder, exclusive licensee or non-exclusive licensee must endeavor to mark, pursuant to Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, products covered by the registered utility model or the packaging of the same with a mark (hereinafter referred to as an "utility model registration mark") indicating the product to be covered by a registered utility model.

Article 52It is prohibited for any person to take the following actions.

Article 53(1)The Japan Patent Office publishes the utility model gazette.

(2)The provisions of Article 193, paragraph (2) (limited to the parts to which items (iv) through (vi), (viii) and (ix) pertain) apply mutatis mutandis to the utility model gazette.

Article 54(1)The following persons must pay the amount of fees that Cabinet Order specifies in view of the actual costs:

(2)A person set forth in the center column of the appended table must pay the amount of fees that Cabinet Order specifies within the scope of the amount of money set forth in the lower column of the table.

(3)The two preceding paragraphs do not apply if the person that would be required to pay the fee pursuant to those paragraphs is the national government.

(4)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) or (2), if a utility model or a right to obtain a utility model registration is held under the joint ownership of the national government and a person or persons other than the national government and their shares have been agreed upon, the fee that is payable by the national government pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) in respect of their own utility model or right to obtain a utility model registration (but only a fee specified by Cabinet Order; excluding the fee for filing for a technical opinion about a utility model) is the amount arrived at by multiplying the fee provided for in those provisions by the percentage that represents the share of each person other than the national government, and, this is the amount that the person or persons other than the national government must pay.

(5)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2), if a utility model or a right to obtain a utility model registration is held under joint ownership with the national government or a person or persons receiving a reduction or exemption under paragraph (8) or the provisions of any other laws and regulations from the fee for filing for a technical opinion about a utility model (hereinafter referred to in this paragraph as a "reduction or exemption") and their shares have been agreed upon, the amount of the fee for filing for the technical opinion about the utility model which is payable by such persons pursuant to paragraph (2) in respect of their utility model or right to obtain a utility model registration is the sum total arrived at by first multiplying, for each joint owner other than the national government, the applicable fee for filing for the technical opinion about a utility model provided for in paragraph (2) (for a person receiving a reduction or exemption, this means the fee provided for in that paragraph less that reduction or exemption) by the percentage that represents that person's share, and then adding together the amounts so arrived at, and this sum total is the amount that the person or persons other than the national government must pay.

(6)If the amount of a fee calculated pursuant to one of the two preceding paragraphs is not a multiple of ten yen, that fee is rounded down to the nearest multiple of ten yen..

(7)Payment of a fee referred to in paragraph (1) or (2) must be made with patent revenue stamps, pursuant to Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry; provided, however, that if so stipulated by an Order of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, a cash payment may be made.

(8)If the person requesting a technical opinion about a utility model in connection with an device claimed in the application for utility model registration or in connection with a registered utility model is the creator of that device claimed in that application for a utility model registration, the creator of that registered utility model, or the heir of the same, and the Commissioner of the Patent Office finds that, due to financial hardship, it would be difficult for the person to pay the fee that pursuant to paragraph (2), must be paid for filing the request for the technical opinion about a utility model the commissioner pursuant to the provisions specified by Cabinet Order, may reduce that fee or exempt the person from paying it.

Article 54-2(1)If after a request for a technical opinion about a utility model is filed, it is deemed pursuant to Article 12, paragraph (7), not to have been filed, the fee the requester has paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2) for filing that request is refunded to that person.

(2)If a demand for a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model is withdrawn within the time frame provided in Article 39-2, paragraph (3) or (5) (or, if the time frame period provided in Article 39-2, paragraph (3) has been extended under the provisions of Article 4 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 39-2, paragraph (4), within the extended time frame), the fee for filing the demand for trial or appeal which the person demanding the trial or appeal has paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2) is refunded to that person upon request.

(3)A request for a refund of the fees under the provisions of the preceding paragraph may be filed once six months have passed since the date on which the demand for the trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model is withdrawn.

(4)If the intervenor in a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model withdraws the application for intervention within 30 days from the receipt of notice under Article 39, paragraph (5), the fee that the intervenor has paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2) for applying to intervene is refunded to the intervenor upon request.

(5)The provisions of Article 4 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to the time frame provided in the preceding paragraph (4).In this case, the phrase "The Commissioner of the Patent Office" in that Article is deemed to be replaced with "The chief administrative judge."

(6)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4), if the intervenor in a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model is unable to withdraw the application for invention with the period provided for in that paragraph due to reasons beyond the intervenor's control, but withdraws the application within 14 days (or within two months, if the intervenor is an overseas resident) after the date on which those reasons cease to exist and no later than six months after the end of the aforementioned period, the fees that the intervenor has paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2) for applying to intervene are refunded to the intervenor upon request.

(7)A request for refund of the fees under the provisions of paragraphs (4) and (6) may not be filed once six months have passed since the date on which the application for intervention was withdrawn.

(8)If the intervenor in a trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model does not withdraw the application for intervention, but the demand for the trial is withdrawn within the time frame provided in paragraph (4) or (6) (or, if the frame provided in paragraph (4) has been extended pursuant to Article 4 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to paragraph (5), within the extended time frame), the fees that the intervenor has paid pursuant to Article 54, paragraph (2) for filing the application to intervene are refunded to the intervenor upon request; provided, however, that this does not apply if the trial procedure have been continued pursuant to Article 148, paragraph (2) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 41.

(9)A request for refund of the fees under the preceding paragraph may not be filed once one year has passed since the date on which the demand for the trial for invalidation of the registration of a utility model was withdrawn.

(10)Fees paid in excess or in error are refunded at the request of the person that paid them.

(11)A request for a refund of fees under paragraph (11) may not be filed once one year has passed since the date on which they were paid.

(12)If the person making a request for the refund of a fee prescribed in paragraph (2), (4), (6), (8) or (10), is unable to make the request prescribed in within the period provided in paragraphs (3), (7), (9), (11) or prescribed in the previous paragraph, due to reasons beyond their control, the person may make the request within 14 days (or within two months, if the demandant is an overseas resident) from the date on which those reasons cease to exist, but not later than six months after the aforementioned period..

Article 55(1)The provisions of Article 186 (Request for a Certificate) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to a utility model registration.

(2)The provisions of Articles 189 through 192 (Service) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to services under the provisions of this Act.

(3)The provisions of Article 194 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to procedures.In this case, the term "the examination" in paragraph (2) of the relevant Article is deemed to be replaced with "the preparation of a technical opinion about a utility model provided for Article 12, paragraph (1) of the Utility Model Act."

(4)The provisions of Article 195-3 of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to a disposition under the provisions of this Act or under an order issued based on this Act.

(5)The provisions of Article 195-4 (Restriction on Appeals under the Provisions of the Administrative Appeals Act) of the Patent Act apply mutatis mutandis to a trial decision, a ruling dismissing a written request for a trial or appeal, or retrial, and to a disposition with regard to which it is decided that an appeal may not be filed pursuant to this Act.

Article 56A person who infringes a utility model right or exclusive license is subject to imprisonment with required labor for a term not exceeding five years, a fine not exceeding 5,000,000 yen, or both.

Article 57A person who has obtained a utility model registration or a trial decision by means of a fraudulent act is punished by imprisonment with work for a term not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding 1,000,000 yen.

Article 58A person that fails to comply with Article 52 is subject to imprisonment with required labor for a term not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding 1,000,000 yen.

Article 59(1)A witness, expert or interpreter who has sworn under oath pursuant to this Act and then offered a false statement, false expert opinion, or false interpretation to the Japan Patent Office or the court commissioned thereby is subject to imprisonment with required labor for a term of between three months and ten years.

(2)If a person who has committed the crime referred to in the preceding paragraph makes a voluntary confession before the certified copy of the judgment in the case is served or before the trial decision becomes final and binding, the sentence may be reduced or remitted.

Article 60Any present or former official of the Japan Patent Office who discloses or misappropriates confidential information about an Device claimed in a pending application for utility model registration that the official has learned in connection with official duties is subject to imprisonment with required labor for a term not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding 500,000 yen.

Article 60-2(1)A person that violates an protective order under the provisions of Article 105-4, paragraph 1 of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 30 of this Act is subject to imprisonment with required labor for a term not exceeding five years, a fine not exceeding 5,000,000 yen, or both.

(2)The crime referred to in the preceding paragraph may not be prosecuted unless a complaint is filed.

(3)The crime referred to in paragraph (1) also applies to a person who commits that crime outside Japan.

Article 61(1)If the representative of a corporation, or the agent, employee or other worker of a corporation or individual commits a, violation of the provisions set forth in one of the following items in connection with the business of that corporation or individual, beyond the offender being subject to punishment, the corporation is subject to the fine prescribed in the relevant item and the individual is subject to the fine prescribed in the Article referred to in that item:

(2)In a case referred to in the preceding paragraph, a complaint as referred to in Article 60-2, paragraph (2) which is filed against the offender also has effect against the corporation or individual, and a complaint that is filed against the corporation or individual also has effect against the offender.

(3)If a fine is imposed on a corporation or individual pursuant to paragraph (1) in connection with a violation referred to in Article 56 or 60-2, paragraph (1), the period of prescription is governed by the same rules as for the crimes referred to in those provisions.

Article 62If a person who has sworn under oath pursuant to the provisions of Article 207, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 151 of the Patent Act which is respectively applied upon mutatis mutandis application pursuant to Articles 71, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 26 of the Patent Act, or pursuant to Article 41 of the Patent Act, or upon mutatis mutandis application pursuant to Article 174, paragraph (3) of the Patent Act as it applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 45 of this Act, , offers a false statement to the Japan Patent Office or the court commissioned thereby, the relevant person is subject to a non-criminal fine not exceeding 100,000 yen.

Article 63A person that, pursuant to this Act, has been summoned by the Japan Patent Office or the court commissioned thereby but that, without a legitimate reason for doing so, fails to appear or refuses to swear, under oath, offer a statement, testify, give an expert opinion, or provide interpretation is subject to a non-criminal fine not exceeding 100,000 yen.

Article 64A person that, pursuant to this Act is, ordered by the Japan Patent Office or the court commissioned thereby to submit or present documents or other materials for examination or for the preservation of evidence, but that, without a legitimate reason for doing so, fails to comply with that order, is subject to a non-criminal fine not exceeding 100,000 yen.