{"id":56530,"date":"2026-05-21T12:01:01","date_gmt":"2026-05-21T12:01:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/?post_type=legal_developments&p=56530"},"modified":"2026-05-21T12:01:01","modified_gmt":"2026-05-21T12:01:01","slug":"in-january-2026-the-intellectual-property-divisions-of-the-tokyo-district-court-the-tdc-ip-division-published-their-guidelines-for-standard-essential-patents-judicial-med","status":"publish","type":"legal_developments","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/thought-leadership\/in-january-2026-the-intellectual-property-divisions-of-the-tokyo-district-court-the-tdc-ip-division-published-their-guidelines-for-standard-essential-patents-judicial-med\/","title":{"rendered":"In January 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court (the \u201cTDC IP Division\u201d) published their \u201cGuidelines for Standard Essential Patents Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)\u201d (the \u201cGuidelines\u201d) which follows the earlier publication of the TDC IP Division\u2019s \u201cGuidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents\u201d (the \u201cSEP Lawsuit Guidelines\u201d) , . The Guidelines announced the TDC IP Division\u2019s decision to implement judicial mediation for dispute cases involving standard essential patents (\u201cSEPs\u201d; and such mediation, \u201cSEP Judicial Mediation\u201d), as a special procedure under the intellectual property judicial mediation procedure , 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 (\u201cFRAND\u201d) terms for the SEP holder\u2019s entire global SEP portfolio (such royalty hereinafter referred to as the \u201cGlobal FRAND Royalty\u201d), 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."},"content":{"rendered":"

In January 2026, the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court (the \u201cTDC IP Division<\/strong>\u201d) published their \u201cGuidelines for Standard Essential Patents Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)\u201d (the \u201cGuidelines<\/strong>\u201d)[1]<\/sup><\/a> which follows the earlier publication of the TDC IP Division\u2019s \u201cGuidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents\u201d (the \u201cSEP Lawsuit Guidelines<\/strong>\u201d)[2]<\/sup><\/a>,<\/sup>[3]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Guidelines announced the TDC IP Division\u2019s decision to implement judicial mediation for dispute cases involving standard essential patents (\u201cSEPs<\/strong>\u201d; and such mediation, \u201cSEP Judicial Mediation<\/strong>\u201d), as a special procedure under the intellectual property judicial mediation procedure[4]<\/sup><\/a>, and set out important points regarding the SEP Judicial Mediation. According to the Guidelines, SEP Judicial Mediation is intended to resolve SEP\u2011related disputes including disputes over the licensing royalty under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (\u201cFRAND<\/strong>\u201d) terms for the SEP holder\u2019s entire global SEP portfolio (such royalty hereinafter referred to as the \u201cGlobal FRAND Royalty<\/strong>\u201d), 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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a> 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\u2019s 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<\/a>) (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.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a> For a overview analysis of the SEP Lawsuit Guidelines, please see our firm\u2019s newsletter \u201cPublication of the \u201cGuidelines for Patent Infringement Lawsuits Involving Standard Essential Patents\u201d by the Intellectual Property Divisions of the Tokyo District Court<\/a>.\u201d (NO&T IP Law Update No.17 (March, 2026))<\/p>\n

[3]<\/sup><\/a> To add some further context regarding SEP lawsuits in Japan, in the Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan GK<\/em> 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 \u201cApple Inc. and Apple Japan have a willingness to obtain a license on FRAND terms\u201d and concluded that \u201cthe exercise of the injunction right based on the patent right in question constitutes an abuse of rights (Article 1(3) of the Civil Code).\u201d 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<\/em> case, the Tokyo District Court issued a judgment (the \u201cTokyo District Court Judgment<\/strong>\u201d) 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\u2019s newsletter \u201cThe Japanese court first judgment to grant an injunction based on a FRAND\u2011committed SEP<\/a>\u201d (NO&T IP Law Update No.16 (November, 2025)).<\/p>\n

[4]<\/sup><\/a> The \u201cOperation of the Intellectual Property Mediation Procedure\u201d (in Japanese) setting out the TDC IP Division\u2019s guidelines for intellectual property judicial mediations, is published on the Tokyo District Court\u2019s 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<\/a>), and a corresponding English guide, \u201cGuide to IP Conciliation Proceedings,\u201d is published on the Intellectual Property High Court\u2019s 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<\/a>).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","class_list":["post-56530","legal_developments","type-legal_developments","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/legal_developments\/56530","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/legal_developments"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/legal_developments"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/developments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=56530"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}