We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byDominic Burns
Modified over 3 years ago
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved How can small and medium sized IP offices search and examine patent applications efficiently and effectively? Would it be possible to exploit search and examination (S&E) work done by other IP offices and if so, how? What experience do some IP offices have in contracting work to other IP offices?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 2 The Singapore Experience Vision Considerations Challenges Possible solutions Decision Continued improvement Going forward
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 3 Vision To operate an effective and efficient Patent Office
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 4 Introduction of Revised Patent System 1994 Conduct S&E locally? Are there alternatives?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 5 Considerations Singapore is export-oriented Small population; need to avoid contending with R&D institutes for highly qualified technical experts Duplication of S&E activities Anecdotally, it appears only a small number of patents reach full exploitation
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 6 Challenges Low level of patent filings from nationals Increasing technical complexity of inventions Expansion of patentable subject matter Shortage of expertise Under-resourced and over-stretched public officers Explosion of patent and non-patent prior art Difficulty in recruiting the full complement of examiners Expected high attrition rate of competent examiners
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 7 Possible Solutions To outsource search and examination work to other IP offices? To specialise in particular classes of technology and outsource the rest of S&E work to other IP offices? To rely on S&E reports of certain countries? To rely on international search and examination reports? To work share?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 8 Decision To outsource S&E work To maximise the value of corresponding S&E reports from prescribed IP Offices To maximise the value of corresponding international search reports and international preliminary examination reports Translates to more opportunities for applicants Applicant has a choice of several routes to obtain the grant of a patent
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 9 Partners (Examiners) Long term relationship Win-win approach Austrian Patent Office (1995) IP Australia (1995) Danish Patent & Trademark Office (2003) Hungarian Patent Office (2009) Work is distributed according to quota Applicants dont get to choose the examiners Fees are leveled out across the four patent offices
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 10 Continued Improvement Since 2005 – annual dialogue among examiners and users and IP associations in Singapore Surveys conducted on service quality of examiners Invitation for written comments from users – consolidated feedback given in advance of meeting
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 11 Started June 2010 – biannual newsletters: To share generally patent filing statistics on S&E requests, case briefs of recent decisions and law changes To share individually with examiners their quality service levels Win-win approach connecting IPOS with each Examiner Continued Improvement
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 12 LOCAL ROUTE Local Search & Examination (Examiners = IP Australia, Austrian, Danish and Hungarian Patent Offices) FOREIGN ROUTE Reliance on corresponding Search & Examination Results (Patent Offices = AU, CA*, JP, NZ, ROK, UK, US, EPO*) * Applications filed In English NB. For PCT SG national phase entrants, they can rely on their ISR & IPRP (Chap 1 or 2) SG patent laws MIXED ROUTE Reliance on corresponding Search Results + Request for Local Examination
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 13 Going Forward Proposal: Could WIPO provide value added services of Aggregation and Coordination of patent S&E services (ACSES) for countries that are prepared to outsource their S&E work?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 14 How is ACSES different from WIPOs International Cooperation for the Search and Examination of Inventions (ICSEI) programme?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 15 ACSES Open to all interested IP Offices – countries with no S&E expertise or lacking in expertise in certain fields, large offices with backlog problems Centralised quality control Monitoring of service standards and timeliness ICSEI For developing countries and ARIPO only
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 16 ACSES Provides for further written opinions or correspondence upon receiving the opinion of the examiners Provides for amendments and further correspondence with examiners ICSEI No provision for further written opinions or correspondence
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 17 ACSES S&E to be conducted according to the respective countries legislation Possibility of officers from participating IP Offices to be attached to the central monitoring authority for training Likely to be a paid service ICSEI Does not cater to requesting countries legislation Service rendered pro bono
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 18 Issues How much will the service fee be? Will there be a fee differential between developed and developing countries? If donor countries are paid, how can we ensure that they continue to contribute to ICSEI?
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 19 Pilot We could start with a pilot to test the concept
Copyright © 2010 IPOS All Rights Reserved 20 Thank You
WPIS WIPO's Patent Information Service for developing countries Current WPIS Analysis of Clients Future Options.
Developing an International Perspective: Using the PCT Jay Erstling Director, Office of the PCT World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Geneva,
PCT Supplementary International Search Service (PCT Rule 45bis applicable from January 1, 2009)
Supplementary International Search (SIS) (PCT Rule 45bis)
The IP Experts 1 BY P. KANDIAH KASS INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD SHAPING BUSINESS STRATEGY THROUGH COMPETITIVE INTELLIGENCE STRATEGIC USE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
PCT FILING - ADVANTAGES© Dr. S. Padmaja, Managing Partner, iProPAT June 21, 2012.
Key Decision Points in the PCT System
Addition 1’s to 20.
Copyright © 2011 IPOS All Rights Reserved ASEAN PATENT EXAMINATION CO-OPERATION (ASPEC) - INTRODUCTION & LATEST DEVELOPMENTS SANDRA LYNN MERINDA Senior.
United States Patent and Trademark Office – IP5 Foundation Projects: why are they necessary for work sharing and what challenges are IP5.
Effective and Efficient Search and Examination of Patent Applications in Small and Medium Size IP Offices Effective and Efficient Search and Examination.
1 Practical Impact of Recent PCT Changes on US Practice Maria Eliseeva Houston Eliseeva LLP American Intellectual Property Law Association October 15,
WIPO Patent Information Services
Presentation of the Chinese Delegation on Its Proposal March 15 to 17, 2011 Moscow.
Dispute Settlement Services offered by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Heike Wollgast, WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.
1 Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved Fig 2.1 Chapter 2.
1 Ignacio de Castro WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Solving Disputes: The Services of the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center WIPO-INSME Training.
Collaboration between WIPO & the Vancouver Group Technical infrastructure for improved international collaboration on search and examination John Alty.
AIPLA/FICPI Colloquium on Reform of the PCT Hotel Radisson SAS, Nice April 8-9, 2003 OVERVIEW OF RECENT CHANGES Claus Matthes Head, PCT Reform Section,
VANCOUVER GROUP MUTUAL EXPLOITATION Collaboration between UK, Canada and Australia Fatima Beattie Deputy Director General, IP Australia.
Revision of WIPO Standard ST.14 Committee on WIPO Standards, third session Geneva 15 – 19 April 2013 Anna Graschenkova Standards Section.
Recent changes to the PCT - Impact on Third Parties Introduction -Many, if not all, of recent amendments to PCT are user friendly -are they third party.
0 - 0.
1 of 19 Organization and Management New Structures and Alliances IMARK Investing in Information for Development Organization and Management New Structures.
America Invents Act What to Expect from Patent Reform.
1 Geneva, October 2008 YUN Young-Woo IP INFORMATION & WIPO STANDARDS.
PCT PATENT COOPERATION TREATY By: Nico Reyes & Keziah Tan.
Support program for SME IP activity in Japan Naohiko YOKOSHIMA WIPO forum on intellectual property and small and medium-sized enterprises 13 September.
WIPO Recentdv03-1 Changes to the PCT Regulations which came into effect on 1 January 2004.
Niclas Morey, Director International Co-operation PCT developments at the EPO Partnership for Quality, Washington D.C.
Amendments to the PCT Regulations as from 1 January 2009 New publication languages Supplementary international search.
© S Haughton more than 3?
Protection of Intellectual Property Resulting from STCU Projects STCU/NATO Workshop From Science to Business Kiev, Ukraine October 11, 2006 Judson R. Hightower.
Dr. Michael Berger, European Patent Attorney © Michael Berger Intellectual Property (IP): Patents for Inventions.
NA, Yanghee International Application Team Korean Intellectual Property Office National Phase of PCT international applications April 26, 2006
All Rights Reserved. National Library Board Singapore Tracking and Measuring Performance of Reference Services at the National Library Board, Singapore.
IAOD Evaluation Seminar Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO- Best Practices from Initial Evaluations Geneva November, KENYA COUNTRY IP PORTFOLIO.
Managing Intellectual Property Assets in International Business Anil Sinha, Counsellor, SMEs Division World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Scaling up the global initiative on the implementation of the SNA and supporting statistics Meeting on Scaling up the coordination and resources for the.
1 Substantive Patent Harmonization and Japan’s Stance Shinjiro ONO Deputy Commissioner Japan Patent Office 2002 High Technology Protection Summit.
Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.
Innovation and Technology Transfer Innovation and Technology Transfer LIU Jian International Cooperation Department The State Intellectual Property Office.
May 4-8, 2009 Japan Proposals to enhance Quality and Efficiency of the PCT Route (PCT/WG/2/8)
African Aviation Training Organization
Canada OPICCIPO Office de la propriété intellectuelle du Canada Un organisme d’industrie Canada Canadian Intellectual Property Office An Agency of Industry.
PCT REFORM: Why It Is Needed and What Lies Ahead Charles A. Pearson Director Office of PCT Legal Administration.
WIPO 2nd Global Symposium 17 Sep 2010 IP5 Foundation Projects – why are they necessary and what are the challenges? Jan Modin, FICPI CET Special Reporter,
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.