{"id":591,"date":"2018-11-08T10:15:44","date_gmt":"2018-11-08T01:15:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/?post_type=updates&amp;p=591"},"modified":"2018-11-08T10:15:44","modified_gmt":"2018-11-08T01:15:44","slug":"courtdecision-food-product","status":"publish","type":"updates","link":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/updates\/591\/","title":{"rendered":"CourtDecision (Food product)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>[Title of the patent] \u201cFood product containing rice saccharified material and rice oil and\/or inositol\u201d<\/p>\n<p>[Key issue] Support requirement (Article 36, paragraph (6), item (i) of the Patent Act)<\/p>\n<p>Court rescinded a JPO&#8217;s decision on an opposition case, stating &#8220;the state of art as of time of the filing is only a matter to be considered auxiliary in order to understand the description of the claims and the Detailed Description of the Invention, and in principle, should not be treated as a matter to extract a problem to be solved by the invention.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","updates_tag":[3],"class_list":["post-591","updates","type-updates","status-publish","hentry","updates_tag-court-judgment"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates\/591","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/updates"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=591"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"updates_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates_tag?post=591"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}