This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
JURISDICTION REPORT: BRAZIL


GOOD NEWS AS BRAZIL CHANGES DIRECTION


Otto Licks Licks Advogados


Te Brazilian administration signalled a change in policy on the enforcement of Article 39.3 of the World Trade Organization’s Trade-Related Aspects of IP Rights (WTO TRIPS) Agreement regarding data package exclusivity in the same month the Brazilian patent office (INPI) issued a draſt new manual of patent examination procedures.


The Brazilian administration has always failed to comply with


the country’s obligations under Article 39.3 of TRIPS, even after implementing ‘TRIPS-plus’


legislation making infringement of IP


rights over data packages a criminal felony. However, on May 14, 2012, ANVISA’s (the Brazilian food and drugs administration) solicitor’s office disclosed a significant change in its policy on data package exclusivity for the pharmaceutical industry for human products.


The change was first noted in a brief submitted by ANVISA on litigation before Brazilian federal courts reviewing the issuance of marketing approvals for generics and branded non-interchangeable copies of drugs granted in violation of regulatory requirements.


In a document that will please all pharmaceutical companies investing in the development of efficacy and safety information for approval of new drugs, ANVISA stated that infringement of data package exclusivity rights places the economics of the system in jeopardy. ANVISA’s document goes further, disclosing that the agency sees the data produced by copies as also subject to data package exclusivity.


The statements created an immediate effect before the judge, who rendered a decision fully applying Article 39.3 of TRIPS, as implemented by the Decree 1.355/94, as well as Article 195, XIV, of the Brazilian Intellectual Property Law, in order to establish unfair competition protection for pharmaceutical data. The decision is a major blow to the policy of the Brazilian administration, which has in recent years denied the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement as a defence to allegations of infringement of WTO TRIPS obligations above and beyond data package exclusivity.


Te office of the Brazilian Attorney General (AGU) issued a press release on July 4, stating that AGU/ANVISA has a legal duty to protect undisclosed information received for marketing approvals, as set forth in Section 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement and in Article 195, XIV of Law 9,279 of 1996. Te press release reiterates that ANVISA declared that the IP of work done on pharmaceutical test data must be protected in order to ensure the economic development of the country.


Neither ANVISA nor the AGU commented on the term of protection, a much-debated issue in Brazil regarding data package exclusivity. Nothing


www.worldipreview.com


has been said about any changes in the procedure for registration of generic and branded copies. Another salient point was access to data on freedom of information requests and citizen’s petitions.


ANVISA and the AGU’s statements, alongside the decision rendered by the federal court, might signify the start of a new era for the pharmaceutical industry seeking to enforce IP rights before ANVISA, which has always denied any possibility of a linkage system or compliance with the country’s IP laws, despite participating in the examination of patent applications under Article 229-C.


The patent system might show improvements too. In July INPI started a public consultation in order to change the guidelines for examination of patent applications. The guidelines are taken as a priority for the INPI in an action plan up to 2015. The changes might contribute to a substantial decrease in the patent backlog in Brazil—the delay to grant a patent by INPI is currently almost 80 months.


The new guidelines will implement important changes on the analysis of claims submitted by an applicant. INPI will also give priority to the examination of patent applications


“ANVISA DECLARED THAT THE IP OF WORK DONE ON PHARMACEUTICAL TEST DATA MUST BE PROTECTED IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTRY.”


related to pharmaceutical


products. Nevertheless, the patentability of software is still a problem in Brazil. Despite its strong position in favour of granting software patents, INPI has been under pressure from other areas of the Brazilian government that have historically exercised severe control over the software industry. As expected, the new guidelines did not mention any possibility of obtaining a software patent.


Otto Licks is a partner at Licks Advogados. He can be contacted at: otto.licks@lickslegal.com


World Intellectual Property Review September/October 2012 95


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128