Decision and Details
Board of DirectorsAbandonment of the U.S. patent application for the Web Acceleration Engine “WEXAL”
Although the Company made multiple amendments and submitted arguments, the determination that the invention did not meet the non-obviousness requirement was maintained in the most recent notice of reasons for refusal. Taking into account the likelihood of obtaining patent rights and cost-effectiveness, the Company decided to proceed with abandonment.
The impact of abandoning this patent application on the Company’s future business development and results for the current fiscal year is expected to be minor.
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Matter Covered | Abandonment of the U.S. patent application for the Web Acceleration Engine “WEXAL” |
| Decision-Making Body | Board of Directors |
| Decision Date | 11 June 2026 (resolution date) |
| Quantity / scale | U.S. Application No.: 17/783,322 |
| Impact on Business Performance | The impact of abandoning this patent application on the Company’s future business development and results for the current fiscal year is expected to be minor. |
| Reason | Although the Company made multiple amendments and submitted arguments, the determination that the invention did not meet the non-obviousness requirement was maintained in the most recent notice of reasons for refusal. Taking into account the likelihood of obtaining patent rights and cost-effectiveness, the Company decided to proceed with abandonment. |
| Future plans | The Company intends to abandon the U.S. patent application. The specific implementation date has not been disclosed. |
Items this document does not state (5)
These are items the company does not state in this document. We do not leave them blank, nor fill them in from other sources or by inference.
The reasons the company gives
The company's own explanation, not something inferred from the numbers.Although the Company made multiple amendments and submitted arguments, the determination that the invention did not meet the non-obviousness requirement was maintained in the most recent notice of reasons for refusal. The decision was therefore made after taking into account the likelihood of obtaining patent rights and cost-effectiveness.