This Center provides consultation in order to resolve and prevent the escalation of disputes relating to intellectual property.

Click here to see the details

Mediation is a system in which mediators, consisting of one attorney-at-law and one patent attorney, cooperate to resolve a dispute between the parties, and work toward reaching a settlement. Cases are settled and set forth in a settlement agreement based on mediators' opinions and decisions and agreed to by the parties.

Click here to see the details

Arbitration is a process in which the resolution of disputes is entrusted to at least three arbitrators, including an attorney-at-law and a patent attorney, and is based on the parties' agreement to adhere to the arbitrators' binding decision.
Additionally, arbitral expert testimony is heard, and the parties agree to accept a decision which is made on particular facts (For example, the parties agree not to seek an injunction or damages, but request a decision on the issue of whether or not A's products infringe B's patent, and accept such decision.). Rules for Arbitral Proceedings shall be applied to all arbitral expert testimony.

Click here to see the details

Disputes in connection with a JP domain name, such as a dispute in the case where a registered trademark is registered as a JP domain name in bad faith by others, shall be resolved.

Click here to see the details

With regard to patent right, utility model right, design right, and trademark right, advisory opinions shall be issued by one attorney-at-law and one patent attorney on whether or not a subject product falls within the scope of these rights, and on the issue of whether or not there are grounds for invalidating the registration with respect to these rights. There are two types of Center's Advisory Opinions: a unilateral opinion in which only the applicant shall be a party; and a bilateral opinion in which both the applicant and the respondent shall be parties.

Click here to see the details

Advisory Opinion on Essentiality is a procedure to issue advisory opinions by the Center on whether or not a particular patent is essential for implementation of functions and effects as prescribed in a particular technical standard (hereinafter, the "Subject Technical Standard"), based on the agreement between the Center and the licensing organization of essential patents relating to the Subject Technical Standard.

Click here to see the details

If an enterprise has research and development themes or business projects that are still in R&D, trial manufacture, product planning, or mass-production preparatory phases, and it has concerns about the possibility that the themes or projects might infringe third-party’s patents or patent applications, our Advisory Opinion on Operability (AOO) can address such concerns and help clarify the situation. This service is performed by a team of one attorney and one patent attorney, who are listed to assess such cases. Any enterprise or individual, including manufacturer of any size, financial institution, LLP, LLC, industry-university alliance, may apply to receive an AOO.

Click here to see the details

In a business conducted by the implementation of inventions related to a group of patents, one attorney-at-law and one patent attorney who have been registered in advance as candidates for evaluators work together to evaluate the ratio of individual patents to the contribution of the entire patent group to the business from a legal and technical perspective.

Click here to see the details