and Examination Reports

Similar documents
JETRO seminar. Recent Rule change and latest developments at the EPO:

Raising the Bar and EPC changes as from 1 April 2010

PCT procedure before the EPO as International Authority. Camille-Rémy Bogliolo Head, Department of PCT Affairs

Topic 12: Priority Claims and Prior Art

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY. Date of mailing. (day/month/year) PAYMENT DUE. (day/month/year)

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY. Non-establishment of opinion with regard to novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability

2015 Noréns Patentbyrå AB

PCT/GL/ISPE/1 Page 154 PART V WRITTEN OPINION/INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION REPORT

Foreign Patent Law. Why file foreign? Why NOT file foreign? Richard J. Melker

The opposition procedure and limitation and revocation procedures

DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents I INTERNATIONAL PHASE BEFORE THE RECEIVING OFFICE AND INTERNATIONAL BUREAU.. 14

Added matter under the EPC. Chris Gabriel Examiner Directorate 1222

Patents: opposition proceedings and nullity actions a comparison between Europe and Japan

Topic 1: Overview of Search and Examination under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

Outline of PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination PCT Workshop Tokyo February 27-March

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY PCT. INTERNATIONAL PRELIMINARY REPORT ON PATENTABILITY (Chapter II of the Patent Cooperation Treaty)

Criteria for Patentability

Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Substantive Patent Examination. Lutz Mailänder Head, International Cooperation on Examination and Training Section

Chapter 3 Amendment Changing Special Technical Feature of Invention (Patent Act Article 17bis(4))

Proper Drafting of Rejection Rulings

MULTIPLE AND PARTIAL PRIORITIES. Robert Watson FICPI 17 th Open Forum, Venice October 2017

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT)

R 84a EPC does not apply to filing date itself as was no due date missed. So, effective date for and contacts subject matter is

The effects of the EPC

In the Name of Allah the Most Beneficent and the Most Merciful

The European Patent Office An overview on the procedures before the EPO: up to grant, opposition and appeal

Threats & Opportunities in Proceedings before the EPO with a brief update on the Unitary Patent

Patent litigation. Block 1. Module Priority. Essentials: Priority. Introduction

Order on the Examination and Other Processing of Utility Model Applications and Registered Utility Models

EPO boards of appeal decisions. Date of decision 25 November 1987

Speed of processing at the EPO. Timely delivery of quality products

Understanding and Utilization of the ISR and WOISA. Shunsuke YAMAMOTO Examination Standards Office Japan Patent Office

Allowability of disclaimers before the European Patent Office

Utilization of Prior Art Evidence on TK: Opportunities and Possibilities in the International Patent System

Intellectual Property and crystalline forms. How to get a European Patent on crystalline forms?

pct2ep.com the reliable and efficient way to progress your PCT patent application in Europe Pocket Guide to European Patents

POST-GRANT AMENDMENT JOHN RICHARDS

Topic 9: Utilizing Claims of Granted Patents

Information Disclosure Statements 2017 BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLP

Part I Oultine of Examination

Cambios en el el reglamento EPC desde el el 1 de abril de 2010: a a correr!

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group

Overview on EPO s Current Initiatives for Improving Timeliness. Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law

The nuts and bolts of oppositions and appeals. Henrik Skødt, European Patent Attorney

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS. Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN

EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE Guidelines for Examination Part E - Guidelines on General Procedural Matters Amended in December, 2007

FOCUS ON EUROPE. Successful Multilateral Patents Workshop June 26, 2007 GWILYM ROBERTS European Patent Attorney Kilburn & Strode

Strategic Use of the PCT:

Table 1: General overview of the PCT procedure Legend:

Applicants may use three types of granting procedures:

Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Patent Examination

Part 1 Current Status of Intellectual Property Rights

DRAFT. prepared by the International Bureau

BESCHWERDEKAMMERN DES EUROPÄISCHEN PATENTAMTS BOARDS OF APPEAL OF THE EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE CHAMBRES DE RECOURS DE L'OFFICE EUROPEEN DES BREVETS

exclusively in electronic form (no paper notifications will be sent). address: State (that is, country) of nationality:

Accelerated Examination. Presented by Hans Troesch, Principal Fish & Richardson P.C. March 2, 2010

Partial Priorities and Transfer of Priority Rights. Dr. Joachim Renken

Part II. Time limit for completing the International search. Application not searched

Examination Procedure. Japan Patent Office

FICPI & AIPLA Colloquium, June 2007 A Comprehensive Approach to Patent Quality

IP LAW HARMONISATION: BEYOND THE STATUTE

General Information Concerning. of IndusTRIal designs

Chapter 2 Internal Priority

WHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT?

IP: Patent law & prosecution

Demystifying Self-collision at the EPO

Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants

Developing an International IP strategy. Leslie Prichard UK Chartered & European Patent Attorney European Design Attorney culverstons

IP Part IV: Patent prosecution

Newly Signed U.S. Patent Law Will Overhaul Patent Procurement, Enforcement and Defense

PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY

Novelty. Japan Patent Office

DENMARK Patents Regulations Order No. 25 of 18 January, 2013 ENTRY INTO FORCE: 1 February, 2013

Order on Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS REPORT 2015 EDITION

Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO. Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the FOUR OFFICE STATISTICS REPORT 2010 EDITION

R v THE COMPTROLLER-GENERAL OF PATENTS ex parte CELLTECH LIMITED QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION [1991]RPC 475. HEARING-DATES: 21 May 1991.

Inventive Step. Japan Patent Office

EPO boards of appeal decisions. Date of decision 11 June 1981 Case number J 0015/

AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges

The Same Invention or Not the Same Invention? Thorsten Bausch

pct2ep.com Guide to claim amendment after EPO regional phase entry

Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore

Failure to adhere to the above can result to the irrevocable lapsing of a patent application.

FINLAND Patents Decree No. 669 of September 26, 1980 as last amended by Decree No. 580 of 18 July 2013 Enter into force on 1 September 2013

Regulations under the Patent Cooperation Treaty. (as in force from July 1, 2018)

Substantive patent law harmonization: focus on grace period

Patents: Utility Models Overview of requirements, procedures and tactical use in Europe and Japan

THE IP5 OFFICES AND THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT)

Part I PPH using the national work products from the JPO

AIPPI Study Question - Conflicting patent applications

This document gives a brief summary of the patent application process. The attached chart shows the most common patent protection routes.

Chapter 1800 Patent Cooperation Treaty

QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% six months after the publication of European search report

should disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art

Comparison between Opposition Systems in Europe and Japan

Part VIII International Patent Application

Practice for Patent Application

Transcription:

Interpreting and Utilizing Search and Examination Reports WIPO Sub-Regional Workshop, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 29.11.-01.12.2011 Steffen Wolf, European Patent Office, Munich, Germany Work-sharing: Information that can be utilised Search reports Citations Document categories e.g. X, Y, A Relevant passages of citations Claims for which documents are cited Classification information Written opinions / Grants / Refusals / Oral Proceedings Patentability objections e.g. novelty, inventive step, clarity, unity Interpretation of cited documents Documents with related subject-matter Relevant cited and citing documents Top-up search before grant Search strategies - if available Elaborate and complement search queries

Overview European Procedure European Search Procedure European Examination Procedure The European procedure Filing Search Publication Examination Grant Opposition Refusal Appeal Within the legal framework defined by the European Patent Convention

Overview of the Search Procedure Filing Examination on Filing and on Formal requirements 1st Examiner appointed (provisional ex. div. appointed) Search (SR) / Opinion (ESOP) A2 Publication (no SR) A1 Publication (SR) Search (SR) / Opinion (ESOP) A3 Publication (SR) Request for Examination Overview of the Examination Procedure Request for Examination Examining Division appointed Examining Division Applicant (Attorney) Intention to Grant Decision to Refuse

The European Patent Convention R. 61, 62 SR, ESOP A. 82 Unity A. 83 Disclosure A. 84 Clarity Ati Article 92 Search Article 94(1) Examination Art. 52 R. 42 Description R. 43 Claims A. 123 Amendments A. 54 A. 56 A. 57 Novelty Inv. step Industrial Application Overview European Procedure European Search Procedure European Examination Procedure

The Search Report Rule 61 EPC : Content of the European search report (1) The European search report shall mention those documents, [...] which may be taken into consideration in deciding whether the invention [...] is new and involves an inventive step. Rule 43.5 PCT : Citations (a) The international search report shall contain the citations of the documents considered to be relevant. Additionally, the Search Report in EP and PCT contain information about the classification, the fields searched, etc. State of the Art Everything made available to the public by means of... written description by use State of the art oral description or in any other way...before the filing date or the priority date of the application

The Search Report Application number International Patent Classification Category X, Y, A, etc. Relevant to Claim... Cited documents Technical Fields Searched Place of Search Date of Completion of the Search Examiner Categories of Citations X - particularly relevant if taken alone Objection: Lack of novelty or lack of inventive step with one document Y - particularly relevant if combined with another Y-document Objection: Lack of inventive step by combination of two (or more) documents, always in pairs A - Technological background, no objection of lack of novelty or inv. step O - Non-written (e.g. oral) disclosure P - intermediate document, published after priority date but before filing date of the application; used in combination with X, Y, A (e.g. XP) T - Theory or principle underlying the invention E - Earlier patent document, but published on, or after the filing date D - cited in the application L -cited for other reasons

The Search Opinion Rule 62 EPC :Extended European Search Report (EESR) (1) The European search report shall be accompanied by an opinion on whether the application and the invention to which it relates seem to meet the requirements of this Convention [...]. Rule 43bis.1 PCT : Written Opinion (WO-ISA) (a) [...] the International Searching Authority shall [...] establish a written opinion as to: (i) () whether the claimed invention appears to be novel,, to involve an inventive step, [...] and to be industrially applicable; (ii) whether the international application complies with the requirements of the Treaty and these Regulations [...]. A reasoned statement provides better insight than a citation

European Search Opinion- Example Application Number Application documents version Cited documents Objections European Patent Register PCT -WOISA-Example European Patent Register

Overview European Procedure European Search Procedure European Examination Procedure The Examination Process Start of Examination Process when objections apply: Amendments by applicant or issue of a communication by the examining division Most of the Communications in Examination usually follow a structure: - Prior Art - Unallowable Amendments - Clarity issues, Insufficiency of Disclosure - Assessment of Novelty and Inventive Step - Formal Comments: reference signs, acknowledgement of prior art A Communication shall contain all the grounds hindering the grant of a Patent (Rule 71(2) EPC) Grounds may be supported by references to the Case Law

The Examination Process...and looks like this The Examination Process...or like this

Refusal The Examining Division can not find any subject-matter that could be granted (or if the applicant does not amend the application accordingly) The Applicant always has the right to be heard He can request Oral Proceedings (as well as the Examining Division) If at least two members of the Examining Division agree, the application is refused Oral Proceedings Oral Proceedings may be held at request of the applicant or at the examining division's discretion In the Summons to oral proceedings a detailed explanation of the outstanding objections is given Minutes of the oral proceedings are provided and contain essentials of the objections, arguments, etc. European Patent Register

The Right to be heard Art. 113 (1) EPC "The decisions of the European Patent Office may only be based on grounds or evidence on which the parties concerned have had an opportunity to present their comments." General principle: the applicant should not be surprised by objections used in refusals. Always allow the applicant to comment on objections either in writing or orally (telephone, oral proceedings) Often further communications include replies to arguments presented by the applicant Refusal - structure and arguments Summary of facts and submissions Reasons for the decision Reply to arguments by applicant Refusals may be a good source for arguments etc. - detailed reasoning

Grant The Examining Division can find subject-matter that could be granted The Examining Division may help the Applicant by making suitable suggestions, but the Applicant is responsible for them If at least two members of the Examining Division agree, the application is granted The application is informed of the text with which the examining division intends to grant (Rule 71(3) EPC) Suggestions to the applicant Even though it is not the responsibility of the examiner or examining division, many applicants appreciate suggestions to patentable subject- matter Suggestions often help to speed up the procedure Suggestions can be made by: Writing a communication (e.g. in combination with objections to pending claims) Telephone Conversation Personal interview Oral Proceedings or Summons thereto Examples of suggestions: Invite the applicant to include a feature of a dependent claim into the independent claim Invite the applicant to claim a certain embodiment Clarifications Formulate allowable claims

Suggestions to the applicant - by telephone Suggestion The End Thank You very much for your attention Questions? Contact: swolf@epo.org