Update on the patentability of inventions concerning plants and animals under the EPC SUMMARY

Similar documents
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

The EPO follows the EU s Directive on biotechnology patents

Implementing Regulations to the Convention on the Grant of European Patents

The Community Plant Variety Protection System 1

PART I IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS TO PART I OF THE CONVENTION

Raising the Bar and EPC changes as from 1 April 2010

CA/97/16 Orig.: en Munich, President of the European Patent Office. Administrative Council (for information) SUMMARY

Intellectual property and GMOs

QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PATENT SYSTEM IN EUROPE. 1.1 Do you agree that these are the basic features required of the patent system?

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 98/56/EC of 20 July 1998 on the marketing of propagating material of ornamental plants

CA/PL 7/99 Orig.: German Munich, SUBJECT: Revision of the EPC: Articles 52(4) and 54(5) President of the European Patent Office

SWEDEN PATENTS ACT No.837 of 1967 in the version in force from July 1, 2014

Deferred examination of European patent applications. 2. German delegation 3. Netherlands delegation

RESPONSE TO. Questionnaire. On the patent system in Europe INTRODUCTION

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

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

Draft Rules relating to Unitary Patent Protection revised version of Rules 1 to 11 of SC/16/13

ROMANIA Patent Law NO.64/1991 OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO.613/19 AUGUST 2014

Ericsson Position on Questionnaire on the Future Patent System in Europe

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2008/90/EC of 29 September 2008 on the marketing of fruit plant propagating material and fruit plants intended for fruit production

Council Decision of 10 March 2011 authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection (2011/167/EU)

HUNGARY Patent Act Act XXXIII of 1995 as consolidated on March 01, 2015

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

11261/2/09 REV 2 TT/NC/ks DG I

THE ACTS ON AMENDMENTS TO THE PATENT ACT */**/***/****/*****/******/*******

EUROPEAN COMMISSION COMMUNITY PATENT CONSULTATION COMPTIA S RESPONSES BRUSSELS, 18 APRIL

Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

17229/09 LK/mg 1 DG C I

LAW ON THE PROTECTION OF INVENTIONS. No. 50-XVI of March 7, Monitorul Oficial nr /455 din * * * TABLE OF CONTENTS.

RULES OF PROCEDURE. The Scientific Committees on. Consumer Safety (SCCS) Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER)

FINLAND Patents Act No. 550 of December 15, 1967 as last amended by Act No. 101/2013 of January 31, 2013 Enter into force on 1 September 2013

Patent reform package - Frequently Asked Questions

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

The EPO approach to Computer Implemented Inventions (CII) Yannis Skulikaris Director Operations, Information and Communications Technology

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 27 September /12 PI 113 COUR 66 WORKING DOCUMENT

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Questionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights. The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of:

Council Decision of 10 March 2011 authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection (2011/167/EU)

OFFICE FOR HARMONIZATION IN THE INTERNAL MARKET (TRADE MARKS AND DESIGNS) Communication No 2/12 of the President of the Office.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVA / No. 12 / 29 AVGUST 2011, PRISTINA. LAW No. 04/L-029 ON PATENTS LAW ON PATENTS

OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO.613/19 AUGUST 2014 REPUBLICATION PATENT LAW NO.64/1991 1

FUTURE PATENT POLICY IN EUROPE PUBLIC HEARING 12 JULY European Commission "Charlemagne" Room S3 Rue de la Loi 170 Brussels REPORT

New IP Code changes regarding patents, new post-grant opposition and enforcement provisions

DGB 3B EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 5 November 2015 (OR. en) 2013/0435 (COD) PE-CONS 38/15 DENLEG 90 AGRI 362 CODEC 956

Dear Mr Nooteboom, Please acknowledge the receipt of this . Yours faithfully, Dr. Miklós Bendzsel, president Hungarian Patent Office

Principles, procedures and recent developments in respect of the Community Plant Variety Protection system.

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) /... of XXX

Official Journal of the European Union L 251/3

European Commission Questionnaire on the Patent System in Europe

Questionnaire May 2003 Q Scope of Patent Protection. Response of the UK Group

Draft agreement on a Unified Patent Court and draft Statute - Revised Presidency text

Questionnaire. On the patent system in Europe

FICPI 12 th Open Forum

13346/15 JDC/psc 1 DPG

GENEVA STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LAW OF PATENTS. Thirteenth Session Geneva, March 23 to 27, 2009

Unitary Patent Procedure before the EPO

L 267/8 Official Journal of the European Union DIRECTIVES

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

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

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE. No 200/2016. of 30 September amending Annex IX (Financial services) to the EEA Agreement [2017/277]

Amended proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers.

(Acts whose publication is obligatory) of 23 February 2005

EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION SUPERVISOR

Law on the protection of inventions No. 50/2008 of the Republic of Moldova can be found at:

DRAFT REPORT. EN United in diversity EN 2012/2135(INI)

ARE EXPRESSED SEQUENCE TAGS PATENTABLE UNDER THE EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION? A PRACTITIONER'S VIEW

(Text with EEA relevance) (2010/C 122 E/03)

SPLH - Exchange of views on the documents produced by the Tegernsee Experts Group SUMMARY

How to get a European patent. Guide for applicants

PATENT ACT (UNOFFICIAL CLEAR TEXT) I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

CA/102/17 Orig.: en Munich, Amendments of the Rules relating to Fees. President of the European Patent Office

Opinion of the European Banking Authority on cooperation with third countries Article 161(7) CRD

EUROPEAN COMMISSION PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR INQUIRY PRELIMINARY REPORT - 28 November 2008 COMMENTS FROM THE EPO

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE. No 199/2016. of 30 September amending Annex IX (Financial services) to the EEA Agreement [2017/276]

10821/16 CDP/LM/vpl DGG 3 B

4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Amended proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE

Council of the European Union Brussels, 24 February 2016 (OR. en)

[English translation by WIPO] Questionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights

EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 12 December 2012 (OR. en) 2011/0093 (COD) PE-CONS 72/11 PI 180 CODEC 2344 OC 70

Basic Legal Questions for Pre-Exam and Paper D

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

Article 53(b) EPC: A Challenge to the Novartis Theory of European Patent History

Order on Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates

Overview of Trial for Invalidation and Opposition Systems in Japan. March 2017 Trial and Appeal Department Japan Patent Office

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Amended proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

The EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal decides on dosage regimens (G2/08) and treatment by surgery (G1/07)

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Questionnaire. On the patent system in Europe

New Decisions of the Technical Boards of Appeal. Dr. Leonard Werner-Jones Dr. Ursula Kinkeldey (Retired Chairwoman Board of Appeal)

This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents

General Information Concerning. of IndusTRIal designs

EVOLUTION OF THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT OF PLANT BREEDERS RIGHTS.

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

MATTERS CONCERNING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND GENETIC RESOURCES, TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE (IGC)

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

(Legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Transcription:

CA/PL 3/18 Orig.: en Munich, 30.01.2018 SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: ADDRESSEES: Update on the patentability of inventions concerning plants and animals under the EPC President of the European Patent Office Committee on Patent Law (for information) SUMMARY In its 152nd meeting on 29 June 2017 the Administrative Council decided to clarify the interpretation of Article 53(b) EPC by way of amendment of Rules 27(b) and 28 EPC in order to exclude from patentability plants and animals exclusively obtained by an essentially biological process. The amendment to the Implementing Regulations was based on a favourable opinion given by the Committee on Patent Law in the 48th meeting in April 2017 and took also account of the Notice of the European Commission from November 2016 related to certain articles in the EU Directive on biotechnological inventions (98/44/EC). In order to provide instructions to examining and opposition divisions for application of the amended practice, the Guidelines for examination were adapted before their entry into force in November 2017. The co-operation with the Community Plant Variety Office continues. CA/PL 3/18

- I - TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Page I. STRATEGIC/OPERATIONAL 1 II. RECOMMENDATION 1 III. MAJORITY NEEDED 1 IV. CONTEXT 1 V. UPDATES 3 A. AMENDMENT TO THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATION 3 B. ADAPTATION OF THE GUIDELINES FOR EXAMINATION 4 C. EPO/CPVO CO-OPERATION 6 VI. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 7 VII. LEGAL BASIS 7 VIII. DOCUMENTS CITED 7 IX. RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLICATION 8 CA/PL 3/18

I. STRATEGIC/OPERATIONAL 1. Operational. II. RECOMMENDATION 2. The present document is submitted to the Committee on Patent Law for information. III. MAJORITY NEEDED 3. N/A. IV. CONTEXT 4. Under Article 53(b) EPC European patents shall not be granted in respect of plant or animal varieties or essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals. The wording of the provision and the wording of Article 4(1) of Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (hereafter "EU Biotechnology Directive") are identical. 5. Pursuant to Rule 27 EPC, in the version of 1 July 2017, biotechnological inventions shall also be patentable if they concern (a) biological material which is isolated from its natural environment or produced by means of a technical process even if it previously occurred in nature, as well as (b) without prejudice to Rule 28, paragraph 2, plants or animals if the technical feasibility of the invention is not confined to a particular plant or animal variety. This provision corresponds to Articles 3(2) and 4(2) of the EU Biotechnology Directive. Under Rule 26(1) EPC the EU Biotechnology Directive shall be used as a supplementary means of interpretation when applying and interpreting the relevant provisions of the EPC. Rules 26-29 EPC were inserted into the EPC in 1999 in order to implement the requirements of the EU Biotechnology Directive in European patent law. 1 6. According to new Rule 28(2) EPC, in the version of 1 July 2017, under Article 53(b), European patents shall not be granted in respect of plants or animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process. 7. The EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal gave an interpretation of the exclusion of essentially biological processes within the meaning of Article 53(b) EPC in its combined decisions G 2/07 and G 1/08 of 9 December 2010 2. 1 See Administrative Council document CA/7/99 of 4 May 1999 and the notice dated 1 July 1999 concerning the amendment of the Implementing Regulations to the European Patent Convention, OJ EPO 1999, 573. 2 OJ EPO 2012, 130 and 206. See also document CA/PL 4/17, point 6. CA/PL 3/18 1/8

8. In 2015, before the amendment of Rule 28 EPC, the Enlarged Board of Appeal gave a positive opinion on the allowability of a product claim directed to plants or plant material obtained by an essentially biological process. Patentability was allowed, provided that the application or patent and the invention to which it relates fulfils the formal and substantive requirements of the EPC (see combined decisions G 2/12 and G 2/13 of 25 March 2015 3 ). 9. Following the resolution adopted by the European Parliament in December 2015 4, asking the EU Commission to clarify the patentability of conventional plants under the EU Biotechnology Directive, on 3 November 2016 the EU Commission adopted Notice C/2016/6997 on certain articles of the EU Biotechnology Directive 5 (hereafter "EU Commission Notice"). Based on an analysis of the travaux préparatoires relating to the adoption of the EU Biotechnology Directive, particularly concerning Article 4, as well as on an interpretation of other provisions of the EU Biotechnology Directive, the EU Commission took the view that the EU legislator's intention when adopting the EU Biotechnology Directive was to exclude from patentability products (plants/animals and plant/animal parts) that are obtained by means of essentially biological processes 6. 10. In previous meetings of the Committee on Patent Law the patentability of plantrelated inventions was discussed in the light of both decisions G 2/12 and G 2/13 and of the EU Commission Notice 7. 11. In its 48th meeting on 27 and 28 April 2017 the Committee on Patent Law discussed various options for the way forward on the basis of the analysis prepared by the Office (CA/PL 4/17). The option of amending the EPC Implementing Regulations and the specific wording set out in the Office's analysis benefited broad support. This outcome was reached in the desire to find a balance between legal certainty, clarity and swift action. For the precise wording of the amendment, alternative proposals from the Swiss delegation, which was later withdrawn, as well as from Business Europe (CA/PL 8/17) and epi (CA/PL 9/17) were taken into account in addition to the draft text included in the Office's analysis (point 98 of CA/PL 4/17). The Committee invited the Office to maintain the technical details of points 70-91 of CA/PL 4/17 in the Council document as explanatory notes. The potential for using disclaimers in claims relating to plant patents was to be considered further in the context of the explanatory note. The Committee further invited the Office to adapt the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO to clarify the implementation of the provisions. 3 OJ EPO 2016, A27 and A28. See also document CA/PL 4/17, point 7. 4 P8_TA-PROV(2015)0473: European Parliament Resolution of 17 December 2015 on patents and plant breeder s rights, 2015/2981 (RSP). 5 Official Journal of the EU C 411/3 of 8 November 2016. 6 The EU Commission Notice also addressed other measures, namely compulsory cross-licensing and acces to and deposit of biological material. 7 See documents CA/PL 12/15, CA/PL 3/16, CA/PL 4/16 and CA/PL 18/16 CA/PL 3/18 2/8

12. On this basis the Office submitted a proposal for amendment of the Implementing Regulations to the EPC for decision by the Administrative Council in June (CA/56/17). V. UPDATES A. AMENDMENT TO THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATION 13. On the basis of Articles 33(1)(c) and 35(2) EPC, by decision CA/D 6/17 of 29 June 2017 8 the Administrative Council adopted amendments to Rules 27(b) and 28 EPC in order to exclude from patentability plants and animals exclusively obtained by an essentially biological process 9. The amendment to the Implementing Regulations took account of the EU Commission Notice. By aligning the EPC and the EPO's practice under Article 53(b) EPC with the interpretation of the EU Biotechnology Directive set out in the EU Commission Notice, the amendment safeguards uniformity in harmonised European patent law. At the same time it provides users of the European patent system with more clarity and legal certainty. 14. Amended Rule 27(b) EPC - Patentable biotechnological inventions reads as follows: "Biotechnological inventions shall also be patentable if they concern: (a) Unchanged (b) without prejudice to Rule 28, paragraph 2, plants or animals if the technical feasibility of the invention is not confined to a particular plant or animals variety; (c) Unchanged." 15. New Rule 28(2) EPC - Exceptions to patentability reads as follows: Under Article 53(a), European patents shall not be granted in respect of biotechnological inventions which, in particular, concern the following: (a) Unchanged (b) Unchanged (c) Unchanged (d) Unchanged. (2) Under Article 53(b), European patents shall not be granted in respect of plants or animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process. 16. The amended Rules entered into force on 1 July 2017. The clarifying nature of the amendment implies that the law has always been in conformity with that interpretation and is thus applicable to European and international applications filed on or after the date of entry into force as well as to pending European patent applications and European patents. This corresponds to the approach taken in the framework of incorporating the EU Biotechnology Directive into the EPC in 1999 10. 8 Cf. Decision of the Administrative Council of 29 June 2017 amending Rules 27 and 28 of the Implementing Regulations to the European Patent Convention (CA/D 6/17), in OJ EPO 2017, A 56. 9 A corresponding exclusion is also present in the national law of certain member states (DE, FR, NL, IT). 10 See T 272/95, point 4 of the Reasons for the Decision. See G 2/07 and G 1/08, OJ EPO 2012, 130 and 206, point 2.4 of the Reasons for the Decision; T 716/91, not published in the OJ EPO, point 2.2 of the CA/PL 3/18 3/8

17. Affected proceedings, which had been stayed ex officio by decision of the President of the EPO on 24 November 2016 11 pending a clarification by the Administrative Council, are gradually resumed and are examined according to the amended Rules 12. B. ADAPTATION OF THE GUIDELINES FOR EXAMINATION 18. The Guidelines for Examination in the EPO are annually updated. The latest edition entered into force on 1 November 2017 and contains instructions to assist examining and opposition divisions in the application of the amended Rules. The new content of the relevant sections in the Guidelines essentially reflect the technical details used as explanatory notes in CA/PL 4/17 (points 70-91). An extraordinary meeting of the SACEPO Working Group Guidelines was scheduled in July 2017 to consult users on the intended text. 19. The exclusion of plants or animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process according to new Rule 28(2) has been reflected in G-II, 5 (5.2 (ii); 5.3 and 5.4). In section G-II, 5.4 it is clarified that the purpose of Rule 28(2) EPC is to exclude products (plants/animals and plant/animal parts) exclusively obtained by non-technical, i.e. essentially biological, processes. Thus, the exclusion extends to plants and animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process where no direct technical intervention in the genome of the plants or animals takes place, as the relevant parental plants or animals are merely crossed and the desired offspring is selected for. 20. As discussed in the 48th meeting of the Committee on Patent Law, the term exclusively is used to clarify that a plant or animal originating from a technical process or characterised by a technical intervention in the genome is not covered by the exclusion from patentability even if in addition a non-technical method (crossing and selection) is applied in its production. Therefore the plants or animals produced by a technical process which modifies the genetic characteristics of the plant or animal are patentable. Reasons for the Decision; as well as G 9/93, OJ EPO 1994, 891, point 6.1 of the Reasons for the Decision. 11 Notice from the European Patent Office dated 24 November 2016 concerning the staying of proceedings due to the Commission Notice on certain articles of Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, OJ EPO 2016, A104. 12 See Notice from the European Patent Office dated 3 July 2017 concerning the resumption of proceedings following the decision of the Administrative Council of 29 June 2017 to amend Rules 27 and 28 EPC in order to exclude from patentability under Article 53(b) EPC plants and animals exclusively obtained by essentially biological processes, OJ EPO 2017, A 62. CA/PL 3/18 4/8

21. Determining whether a plant or animal is obtained by exclusively biological means entails examining whether there is a change in a heritable characteristic of the claimed organism which is the result of a technical process exceeding mere crossing and selection, i.e. not merely serving to enable or assist the performance of the essentially biological process steps. 22. This implies that, provided the invention is not confined to a particular plant or animal variety (cf. G 1/98 of 20.12.1999 13 ), transgenic plants or animals and technically induced mutants are patentable. Both targeted mutation, e.g. with CRISPR/Cas, and random mutagenesis such as UV-induced mutation are such technical processes. When looking at the offspring of transgenic organisms or mutants, if the mutation or transgene is present in said offspring, it is not produced exclusively by an essentially biological method and is thus patentable. 23. The reference to the general principles governing disclaimers, which has been added in GL, G-II, 5.4 is particularly relevant for claims directed to technically induced mutants. It is envisaged to add a further passage in the Guidelines 2018 with regard to the use of disclaimers in such claims, to exclude plants or animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process. Account will be taken of the outcome of the proceedings G 1/16, which were pending at the Enlarged Board of Appeal during the drafting of the 2017 edition. 24. Plant or animal propagation material is to be treated in the same manner as the plants or animals themselves. Thus it falls under the exclusion if the technical effect is brought about by an essentially biological process. However the exclusion does not extend to plant or animal parts, which are not propagation material and derived products, such as flour, fatty acids, sugars. These products are treated as chemical products and, provided the general patentability requirements are fulfilled, are patentable. The technicality of a claimed plant or animal product may also lie in a non-heritable physical feature imparted directly to the claimed organism, e.g. a seed coated with a beneficial chemical. 25. Under section G-II, 5.4.2 the exclusion of essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals is addressed. In a method claim any step of crossing, either implicit or explicit, leads to an objection under Article 53(b) EPC. It has been further clarified that where an essentially biological method contains an additional feature of a technical nature, i.e. the use of genetic molecular markers, the method as a whole remains excluded from patentability (cf. G 1/08, G 2/07), however patent protection is available for any such additional technical steps per se which are performed either before or after the process of crossing and selection. 13 OJ EPO, 2000, 111. CA/PL 3/18 5/8

26. A clarification regarding plants or animals defined by a product-by-process claim has been introduced in F-IV, 4.12, in the sense that the technical method of production of the plant or animal, which imparts a technical feature to a product, may be included in the claims in the form of a product-by-process claims. In this context a reference to the general principles governing disclaimers by which plants and animals excluded from patentability are removed from protection has been added (H-V, 3.5 and 4). 27. Additional examples have been provided to illustrate both excluded subject-matter and patentable subject-matter under the new provisions (G-II, 5.4.2.1). 28. In addition to the Guidelines, examining and opposition divisions are provided with administrative instructions issued under Article 10(2)(a) EPC for the application of amended Rules 27(b) and 28(2) EPC. There particular weight is given to the rigorous assessment of the patentability requirements of novelty (Article 54 EPC) and inventive step (Article 56 EPC). Additionally the examination of reproducibility of the claimed invention without undue burden by the skilled person is underlined. In that assessment account is taken of the public availability of the plant line from which the desired trait is obtainable (Article 83 EPC). The requirement of clarity of the claims (Article 84 EPC) is equally applied in a strict manner. 29. During the revision of the Guidelines for Examination 2018 the relevant passages will be completed and expanded. It is also foreseen to revert to the exclusion of conventional plants/animals, once experience will be gathered with the new provisions, as indicated by the Administrative Council at the June 2017 meeting. C. EPO/CPVO CO-OPERATION 30. On 11 February 2016 the EPO signed an Administrative Arrangement with the EU Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) to enhance bilateral co-operation, in particular with the aim to strengthen the interinstitutional relationship through the exchange of information and in order to increase transparency. Two bilateral workshops were held (Angers in September 2016 and Munich in March 2017) to increase technical awareness and legal expertise among experts from both organisations and to share knowledge and working practices. 31. In the perspective of improving the use of databases, a project has been developed to integrate CPVO data on plant varieties into the EPO databases. CPVO data is currently not available in a searchable format. It is expected that the availability of CPVO data for EPO examiners will increase transparency and enhance quality of patents in the plant field. The project is ongoing since clarification is still needed on the public availability of the data. In some cases, the information available to the public is not separate from confidential information contained in the relevant documents. CA/PL 3/18 6/8

32. On 29 November 2017 a joint EPO-CPVO public conference was successfully held in Brussels to illustrate the way in which the two offices co-operate to support innovation in the plant sector. Three panel discussions, bringing together policy makers, experts and industry were dedicated respectively to (i) the European Commission's interpretative Notice, (ii) the benefits of IP protection in the plant sector and (iii) transparency and access to innovation. Updates on the patentability of plant-related inventions under the new EPC rules and on latest developments in the plant-variety rights (PVRs) system were also given. 33. During the conference, speakers underlined the complementarity between plantrelated patents and PVRs and stressed the need to find balanced solutions for their coexistence within the current legal framework. In this context the positive effects of the co-operation were pointed out. Transparency was also emphasised, through patent information and PVR documents freely accessible to the public. With regard to the access to protected information both breeders' initiatives, such as the Patent Information and Transparency Online (PINTO) database linking plant varieties to relevant patent information and the industry-led International Licensing Platform (ILP) were highlighted. The conference attracted some 200 participants from industry and academia, the European Commission, European Parliament, legal practice, national patent offices, NGOs and the general public. 34. The co-operation also embraces further opportunities for technical exchanges, such as the participation of EPO staff members to the CPVO meetings and the participation of CPVO staff to EPO training events. 35. It is intended to continue the co-operation with the CPVO in the future with regular information exchanges and expert meetings. Implementation of CPVO data integration is aimed to be finalized in the course of 2018. VI. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 36. N/A. VII. LEGAL BASIS 37. Article 10(2)(c) EPC; Article 33(1) EPC. VIII. DOCUMENTS CITED 38. CA/7/99; CA/PL 12/15; CA/PL 3/16; CA/PL 4/16; CA/PL 18/16, CA/PL 4/17, CA/56/17, CA/D 6/17. CA/PL 3/18 7/8

IX. RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLICATION 39. Yes. CA/PL 3/18 8/8