The IP5 view on the future of classification IPC Committee of Experts March 2009

The IP5 offices: European Patent Office (EPO) Japan Patent Office (JPO) Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China (SIPO) US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) The IP5 view The IP5 offices

March 2009 History: The IP5 Heads of Office met in Jeju, Korea in October 2008 where they cemented a vision and agreed a roadmap. "The elimination of unnecessary duplication of work among the IP5 offices, the enhancement of patent examination efficiency and quality and guarantee of the stability of patent right "

March 2009 Ten Foundation Projects ProjectLeader Common documentation EPO Common hybrid classification EPO Sharing and documenting search strategies USPTO Common search and examination support tools USPTO Common access to search and examination results JPO Common application format JPO Common training policy KIPO Mutual machine translation KIPO Common rules for examination practice and quality control SIPO Common statistical parameter system for examination SIPO The IP5 view Foundation projects

March 2009 Goals for Common Hybrid Classification Eliminate of unnecessary duplication of work Improve international searching efficiency Utilize the strengths of existing internal classification systems Enhance patent examination efficiency and quality The IP5 view Goals

March 2009 The matter is perceived as urgent The IP5 view Statistics

March 2009 Common Approach for a Hybrid Classification Develop IPC to the necessary depth Start pilot project to evaluate cost and benefits Use mapping tools between existing internal schemes –identify areas for common scheme –assist in searching using internal schemes Co-operate closely with WIPO The IP5 view Hybrid classification

March 2009 What to address at IPC level (~ CE404...) Simplify core/advanced structure Revision cycles Which body should be in charge of revision work Speeding up revisions The IP5 view IPC

March 2009 Core - advanced level One IPC scheme only (= "advanced level") Core level just becomes a way of applying the "one IPC" –Use subclasses and main groups –Offices may choose to classify up to subclass/main group level or to the full IPC –Indication that classification was made up to subclass/main group level only must be present on document record Change name of "Core Level" to "Subclass/main group level" ? The IP5 view IPC

March 2009 Revision cycles IP5 strategy: introduce higher amount of changes 3 month interval not needed 6 month interval = good compromise –spread reclassification work –early publication to allow preparation Allow skipping interval if no significant changes present The IP5 view IPC

March 2009 Body in charge of revision (I) Structure for efficient discussion –"Task force" or "Subcommittee" vs. "whole group" "Main (re-)classifying" offices vs. "Searching" offices Who should be in charge? –A new Subcommittee ? –IPC/WG ? The IP5 view IPC

March 2009 Possible scenario Main stakeholder offices in charge of decision-making Permanent members of the body: –Major reclassifying offices Supplementary members: –Offices proposing projects –Rapporteur offices The IP5 view IPC Body in charge of revision (II)

March 2009 Speeding up revisions Minimize detailed revision work –best available schemes vs. quest for perfection –minimum reclassification work IP5 offices plan to: Transfer block subdivisions from internal systems into the IPC: –Subclasses –Large main groups, etc. Select from one of the existing schemes The IP5 view IPC

March 2009 Timeline Phase I: Planning –Planning and identification of pilot projects –Develop requirements for a mapping and scheme viewing tool –Set-up a training framework Phase II: Pilot projects Implementation of pilot projects The IP5 view Timeline

March 2009 Phase III: Implementation Phase IV: Internal indexing schemes Phase V: Completion of common hybrid classification

March 2009 Thank you for your attention