[1] Arthur, W. B. (2009). The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves. London: Penguin Books.
[2] European Patent Office (2015). Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office. Part G, Chapter Ⅶ/5, Problem-and-Solution Ap-proach.
[3] Graham, v. John Deere Co (1966). 383 US 1, 148 USPQ 459.
[4] Hitachi, Kasei Kōgyō K.K. v. Tokkyo-cho, (Chiteki-zaisan High Ct. 2009). Hanrei Jihō, 2043, 117-127, Hanrei Times, 1299, 272-282.
[5] Hoechst Celenese Corp. v. BP Chemicals Ltd (1997). EWHC 370 (Pat).
[6] īmura, T. (2011). Hatsumei no Yōshi no Nintei to Gijutsuteki-han’i no Kaishaku, sarani Kintō-ron no Katsuyō. Patent, 64, 57-70.
[7] īmura, T. (2014). Tokkyo-ken no Kintō-ron no Seihi ni Kansuru 2, 3 no Ronten. Patent, 67, 128-137.
[8] Japan Patent Office (2015). Examination Guidelines for Patent and Utility Model in Japan. Part 3, Chapter 2, Section 2, Inventive Step.
http://www.jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki_e/t_tokkyo_e/1312-002_e.htm
[9] K.K. Hokukon v. Tokkyo-chō. (Chiteki-zaisan High Ct. 2011). Hanrei Jihō, 2122, 118-127, Hanrei Taimuzu, 1383, 357-365.
[10] Kageyama, K. (2015). Recognition of Inventor/Joint Inventors and Product-by-Process Claims-Based on Consideration of Categorization into Physical-Object & Material Inventions and Formation Process of Inventions. Berlin: Lambert Academic Publishing.
[11] KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (2007). 550 US 398.
[12] Pozzoli SPA v. BDMO SA (2007). EWCA Civ 588.
[13] Sakai Kagaku Kōgyō K.K. v. Kawakami Sangyō K.K. (Chiteki-zaisan High Ct. 2009). Saikō- saibannsho Website, Saibanrei-jōhō, Chiteki-zaisan Saibannrei-shū.
http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/search7
[14] Sewall v. Walters, G. (1994). 21 F3d 411.
[15] Tokkyo-chō and Shadanhōjin Hatsumeikyōkai Ajia Taiheiyō Kōgyō-shoyūken Sentā (APIC), Tsukanaka, T. coop. (2011). Hatsumei no Shinposei.
[16] Tsukahara, T. (2010). Tokkyo no Shinpo-sei no Handan-Kōzō. In Chiteki-zaisan-hō no Atarasii Nagare-Katayama Eiji Sensei Kanreki Kinen Ronbun-shū (pp. 431-432). Tokyo: Seirin-shoin.
[17] United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (2010). Examination Guidelines for Determining Obviousness under 35 USC 103 in View of the Supreme Court Decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/72fr57526.pdf
[18] Windsurfing International Inc. v. Tauber Marine (1985). RPC59.
[19] X v. Debiofāmu Esu ā (Chiteki-zaisan High Ct. 2011). Saikō-saibannsho Website, Saibanrei-jōhō, Chiteki-zaisan Saibannrei-shū.
http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/search7
[20] Yoshifuj, K. (Kumagai, K ed.) (1998). Tokkyo-hō Gaisetsu (13th ed.). Tokyo: Yūhikaku.