JURISDICTION REPORT: EPO
PPH NEWS AND MORE FROM EUROPE
Marianne Holme Holme Patent
Since the launch of the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programme, the European Patent Office (EPO) has recently made agreements with Israel, Canada, Mexico and Singapore to accelerate prosecution of patent applications. Te EPO already has PPH agreements with China’s State Intellectual Property Office, the Japan Patent Office, the Korean Intellectual Property Office and the US Patent and Trademark Office. PPH agreements allow applicants whose patent claims have been found
patentable by one of the above offices to ask for accelerated processing of their corresponding applications pending before another of the offices. Te PPH programme is available at any of the above patent offices and can be entered on request, on the basis of findings both by examiners of international patent applications under the Patent Corporation Treaty and those by national examiners of applications filed at these national offices. Today the EPO has 38 member states. From March 1, 2015, European
patent applications can also be extended to Morocco, even though Morocco is not an EPO member state. Validation in Morocco is not available for applications filed before that date. Extension is subject to a validation fee, which must be paid to the
EPO within six months of the date on which the European patent bulletin mentions the publication of the European search report; this is the same time as when the designation fee and examination fee are due. Paying the validation fee at this stage automatically makes the European patent valid in Morocco and no additional measures need to be taken subsequently, other than paying the renewal fee once a year. A similar agreement with Tunisia was signed on July 3, 2014, but this agreement has not been ratified.
Some new features have been added to the EPO’s patent search engine Espacenet. Since June 2014, a global dossier service has made it possible to
retrieve file wrappers (the patent prosecution history and documents) for Chinese patent applications that have a European patent family member. To some extent even Chinese file wrappers with no European equivalent are available via Espacenet. Te Patent Translate tool of Espacenet offers electronic translation
of English patent documents to many other languages. An updated Patent Translate now includes a correction editor, which offers users the possibility to submit text to be incorporated, to improve Patent Translate.
Unitary patent update Te designation of a unitary patent under the European system is still not available and it is not completely clear when it will be introduced. Some say it will be at the end of 2016, but we need to wait and see. One step
www.worldipreview.com
forward, however, is the long-awaited indication of the level of unitary patent renewal fees. Two proposals, referred to as ‘Top 4’ and ‘Top 5’, have been made
and are based on accumulated renewal fees in either the four or the five EU member states from where the majority of European patent filings originate. Te ‘Top 5’ proposal is also calculated to include a renewal fee reduction for small to medium-sized enterprises, natural persons, non- profit organisations, universities and public research organisations. Te first noticeable difference in fees between the proposals appears
from year ten onwards. Applicants that normally validate their European patents in only a few EU countries may face increased renewal fees when choosing the unitary patent, but may benefit from having a broader geographical scope. Applicants normally validating in a large number of countries may save on renewal costs by choosing the unitary patent. Irrespective of whether they already validate in a few or many
countries, applicants should carefully decide whether they opt for the existing European patent system, in order to have many separate national patents, or go for the unitary patent system, which carries a risk of losing patent protection in all states signed up to the new regime in just one single revocation action.
Marianne Holme is a partner at Holme Patent. She can be contacted at:
mh@holmepatent.dk
World Intellectual Property Review May/June 2015 77
“APPLICANTS NORMALLY VALIDATING IN A LARGE NUMBER OF COUNTRIES MAY SAVE ON RENEWAL COSTS BY CHOOSING THE UNITARY PATENT.”
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