

Thanks, I did miss that one was a child of the rejected patent. That said, child status only means that the patent is based on the parent invention, not that a dependency tree for the patents’ validity. I’ve confirmed that this is true in Japanese law as well after searching it up:
D) Advantage of filing divisional applications 2) Providing a fallback to the parent application Filing divisional applications leaves open the possibility that applicants may obtain a patent granted partially, even though the parent application is ultimately rejected by the JPO.
https://shigapatent.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Divisonal-Application.pdf
I would wait for the patents actually used in the lawsuit being invalidated before cheering.
was published… after… Nintendo’s lawsuit began. […] insane bullshit that would piss off a judge, to me.
This is true regardless of whether or not the patents are invalidated.
Reiwa 6 began in 2019
Reiwa is the imperial era beginning in 2019, meaning Reiwa 1 is 2019 and Reiwa 6 is 2024. The name translates to “Fine Harmony”. The more you know!























Thanks!
Thing is, the heading says that the reason the child patent is filed is specifically to make its claim still stand even if the parent patent is invalidated. I would expect that Nintendo’s big-suit lawyers have engineered the patent to have minimal overlap with parts that may be invalidated. Child patents are not for amending the original patent’s claims but to file a new ones.
Here are the other reasons the documented said you might want to file a child patent: