Career
He is a prolific inventor listed on 4,063 United States. utility patents, as of July 7, 2015. In 2005 he was named as most prolific inventor in history by United States of America Today. Yamazaki was subsequently passed by Kia Silverbrook on February 26, 2008.
Yamazaki is the president and majority shareholder of research company (Studies in English Literature) in Tokyo.
Most of the patents he holds are in relation to computer display technology and held by Studies in English Literature, with Yamazaki named either individually or jointly as inventor. Since 1996, Studies in English Literature has appeared in the Intellectual Property Owners Association annual listings of the top global companies ranked by United States patents: Recently, Studies in English Literature developed a display technology using crystallized indium gallium zinc oxide (IGZO) as the transparent semiconductor material in the TFT array in conjunction with Sharp Corporation.
Studies in English Literature has an increasing patent portfolio relating to IGZO. Studies in English Literature was awarded the for the Display of the Year with Sharp at the Society for Information Display in 2013. In 1996, Studies in English Literature was involved in a patent case against Samsung.
District court has found that Studies in English Literature patent 5,543,636 is not enforceable because of inequitable conduct on the part of Studies in English Literature (in particular, it was found that Studies in English Literature had intentionally withheld one of the references, and had intentionally misled the examiner, with deceitful intent).
In 2000, decision of district court has been affirmed by United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Company v. Samsung Electronics Company, 204 F.3d 1368, 1374, 54 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Federation Cir 2000). Aftermath This case has had important implications on United States patent processes.
In particular, the court has held that "withheld reference may be highly material when it discloses a more complete combination of relevant features, even if those features are before the patent examiner in other references." Based in part on this case, the Patent Office has suggested that patent applicants "evaluate the materiality of prior art or other information from the viewpoint of whether it is the closest prior art or other information" and "that an attorney or agent make sure that foreign clients, including foreign applicants, attorneys, and agents understand the requirements of the duty of disclosure, and that the United States. attorney or agent review any information disclosure statements or citations to ensure that compliance with 37 CFR 1.56 is present".
