Japan

In January 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court (the “TDC IP Division”) published their “Guidelines for Standard Essential Patents Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)” (the “Guidelines”)[1] which follows the earlier publication of the TDC IP Division’s “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents” (the “SEP Lawsuit Guidelines”)[2],[3]. The Guidelines announced the TDC IP Division’s decision to implement judicial mediation for dispute cases involving standard essential patents (“SEPs”; and such mediation, “SEP Judicial Mediation”), as a special procedure under the intellectual property judicial mediation procedure[4], and set out important points regarding the SEP Judicial Mediation. According to the Guidelines, SEP Judicial Mediation is intended to resolve SEP‑related disputes including disputes over the licensing royalty under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms for the SEP holder’s entire global SEP portfolio (such royalty hereinafter referred to as the “Global FRAND Royalty”), on a global basis (i.e., not limited to disputes that arise in Japan) in a more expeditious manner than a SEP Lawsuit administered under the SEP Lawsuit Guidelines. In addition, where a settlement is not reached through mediation, the Guidelines address a point that is expected to influence consideration of the abuse of rights defense (the so-called FRAND defense) in a subsequent lawsuit or preliminary injunction proceeding. Accordingly, the Guidelines will likely have a significant impact on strategies for SEP-related disputes including whether parties should choose to bring a SEP Lawsuit initially or file a petition for SEP Judicial Mediation. We provide below a basic flowchart (with comments) describing the presumed progression of proceedings in a SEP Judicial Mediation in light of the Guidelines, and notable points regarding the Guidelines. [1] Our unofficial English translation of the Guidelines is provided as an annex to this newsletter for reference purposes only. The Guidelines (in Japanese) are published on the Tokyo District Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/tokyo/saiban/minzi_section29_40_46_47/SEPJM_chizai_jiken_teiki/index_2_1.html) (last accessed: April 1, 2026). As of April 1, 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Osaka District Court have not published similar guidelines for SEP-related judicial mediation. [2] For a overview analysis of the SEP Lawsuit Guidelines, please see our firm’s newsletter “Publication of the “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents” by the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court.” (NO&T IP Law Update No.17 (March, 2026)) [3] To add some further context regarding SEP lawsuits in Japan, in the Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan GK case, the Intellectual Property High Court, in its judgment of May 16, 2014, ruled that Samsung, the patent holder, was not entitled to seek an injunction against Apple to stop sales of certain Apple products based on its finding that “Apple Inc. and Apple Japan have a willingness to obtain a license on FRAND terms” and concluded that “the exercise of the injunction right based on the patent right in question constitutes an abuse of rights (Article 1(3) of the Civil Code).” After that decision, there were virtually no court decisions addressing this issue until early 2025. However, on June 23, 2025, in the Pantech v. Google case, the Tokyo District Court issued a judgment (the “Tokyo District Court Judgment”) granting an injunction based on a FRAND-committed SEP for the first time in Japan. For a summary of the Tokyo District Court Judgment and its significance, please see our firm’s newsletter “The Japanese court first judgment to grant an injunction based on a FRAND‑committed SEP” (NO&T IP Law Update No.16 (November, 2025)). [4] The “Operation of the Intellectual Property Mediation Procedure” (in Japanese) setting out the TDC IP Division’s guidelines for intellectual property judicial mediations, is published on the Tokyo District Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/tokyo/saiban/minzi_section29_40_46_47/tizaityoutei/index.html), and a corresponding English guide, “Guide to IP Conciliation Proceedings,” is published on the Intellectual Property High Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/ip/eng/vc-files/eng/file/Guide_to_IP_Conciliation_Proceedings.pdf).

In January 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court (the “TDC IP Division”) published their “Guidelines for Standard Essential Patents Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)” (the “Guidelines”)[1] which follows the earlier publication of the TDC IP Division’s “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents” (the “SEP Lawsuit Guidelines”)[2],[3].  The Guidelines announced the TDC IP Division’s decision to implement judicial mediation for dispute cases involving standard essential patents (“SEPs”; and such mediation, “SEP Judicial Mediation”), as a special procedure under the intellectual property judicial mediation procedure[4], and set out important points regarding the SEP Judicial Mediation. According to the Guidelines, SEP Judicial Mediation is intended to resolve SEP‑related disputes including disputes over the licensing royalty under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms for the SEP holder’s entire global SEP portfolio (such royalty hereinafter referred to as the “Global FRAND Royalty”), on a global basis (i.e., not limited to disputes that arise in Japan) in a more expeditious manner than a SEP Lawsuit administered under the SEP Lawsuit Guidelines. In addition, where a settlement is not reached through mediation, the Guidelines address a point that is expected to influence consideration of the abuse of rights defense (the so-called FRAND defense) in a subsequent lawsuit or preliminary injunction proceeding. Accordingly, the Guidelines will likely have a significant impact on strategies for SEP-related disputes including whether parties should choose to bring a SEP Lawsuit initially or file a petition for SEP Judicial Mediation. We provide below a basic flowchart (with comments) describing the presumed progression of proceedings in a SEP Judicial Mediation in light of the Guidelines, and notable points regarding the Guidelines. [1] Our unofficial English translation of the Guidelines is provided as an annex to this newsletter for reference purposes only. The Guidelines (in Japanese) are published on the Tokyo District Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/tokyo/saiban/minzi_section29_40_46_47/SEPJM_chizai_jiken_teiki/index_2_1.html) (last accessed: April 1, 2026). As of April 1, 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Osaka District Court have not published similar guidelines for SEP-related judicial mediation. [2] For a overview analysis of the SEP Lawsuit Guidelines, please see our firm’s newsletter “Publication of the “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents” by the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court.” (NO&T IP Law Update No.17 (March, 2026)) [3] To add some further context regarding SEP lawsuits in Japan, in the Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan GK case, the Intellectual Property High Court, in its judgment of May 16, 2014, ruled that Samsung, the patent holder, was not entitled to seek an injunction against Apple to stop sales of certain Apple products based on its finding that “Apple Inc. and Apple Japan have a willingness to obtain a license on FRAND terms” and concluded that “the exercise of the injunction right based on the patent right in question constitutes an abuse of rights (Article 1(3) of the Civil Code).” After that decision, there were virtually no court decisions addressing this issue until early 2025. However, on June 23, 2025, in the Pantech v. Google case, the Tokyo District Court issued a judgment (the “Tokyo District Court Judgment”) granting an injunction based on a FRAND-committed SEP for the first time in Japan. For a summary of the Tokyo District Court Judgment and its significance, please see our firm’s newsletter “The Japanese court first judgment to grant an injunction based on a FRAND‑committed SEP” (NO&T IP Law Update No.16 (November, 2025)). [4] The “Operation of the Intellectual Property Mediation Procedure” (in Japanese) setting out the TDC IP Division’s guidelines for intellectual property judicial mediations, is published on the Tokyo District Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/tokyo/saiban/minzi_section29_40_46_47/tizaityoutei/index.html), and a corresponding English guide, “Guide to IP Conciliation Proceedings,” is published on the Intellectual Property High Court’s page on the website of the Courts in Japan (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/ip/eng/vc-files/eng/file/Guide_to_IP_Conciliation_Proceedings.pdf).

In January 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court (the “TDC IP Division”) published the “Guidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents” (the “Guidelines”)[1].  The Guidelines set out important points regarding patent infringement lawsuits involving standard essential patents (“SEPs”; and such lawsuits, “SEP Lawsuits”)[2]. Based on the Guidelines, it appears that the TDC IP Division’s strong intention is for new SEP Lawsuits to be resolved through a settlement-oriented framework centered on the formation of an agreement on licensing royalties under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms for the SEP holder’s entire global SEP portfolio including the SEPs at issue (such licensing royalties, the “Global FRAND Royalty”), and for such agreement on the Global FRAND Royalty to comprehensively resolve all future SEP Lawsuits involving the Global FRAND Royalty filed in Japan. In this regard, the Guidelines will have a significant impact on SEP Lawsuits in Japan and possibly may influence strategies for choosing to commence SEP Lawsuits in Japan. We provide below a flowchart and our comments on the presumed progression of proceedings in a SEP Lawsuit in light of the Guidelines and notable points regarding the Guidelines. View original article here. [Authors] Kenji Tosaki (Partner) Takahiro Hatori (Partner) Yujiro Fukuhara [1] Our unofficial English translation of the Guidelines is provided as an annex to this update for reference purposes only. The Guidelines (in Japanese) are published on the website of the Tokyo District Court (URL: https://www.courts.go.jp/tokyo/saiban/minzi_section29_40_46_47/SEP_tokkyoken_shingai/index_2.html) (last accessed: March 23, 2026). As of March 23, 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Osaka District Court have not published guidelines for SEP-based patent infringement lawsuits similar to the Guidelines. [2] In the Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan GK case, the Intellectual Property High Court, in its judgment of May 16, 2014, ruled that Samsung, the patent holder, was not entitled to seek an injunction against Apple to stop sales of certain Apple products based on its finding that “Apple Inc. and Apple Japan have a willingness to obtain a license on FRAND terms” and concluded that “the exercise of the injunction right based on the patent right in question constitutes an abuse of rights (Article 1(3) of the Civil Code).” After that decision, there were virtually no court decisions addressing this issue until early 2025. However, on June 23, 2025, in the Pantech v. Google case, the Tokyo District Court issued a judgment (the “Tokyo District Court Judgment”) granting an injunction based on a FRAND-committed SEP for the first time in Japan. For a summary of the Tokyo District Court Judgment and its significance, please see our firm’s newsletter “The Japanese court first judgment to grant an injunction based on a FRAND‑committed SEP” (NO&T IP Law Update No.16 (November, 2025)).

Introduction In recent years, the rapid proliferation of generative AI and cloud services has led to a dramatic increase in demand for data processing. Data centers have increasingly taken on the role of critical infrastructure supporting socio-economic activities, with demand for their development particularly rising in urban areas. At the same time, from the perspective of coexistence with local communities, considerations such as environmental impact and alignment with urban development have become increasingly important in data center projects. In response, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government published the “Guidelines for Data Centers Harmonized with Urban Development” (the “Guidelines”) on March 31, 2026. View original article here. [Authors] Yoshihisa Watanabe, Partner Hiroki Kawaguchi Teruaki Arai