1

The Euro-PCT route Recent & Upcoming Changes

Reinoud HesperLawyer Dir. International Legal Affairs - PCT Washington, October 25, 2013

Reinoud Hesper 22

Present Rule 36 EPC - Filing of a divisional application

Since 1 April 2010 filing a divisional application requires The earlier application must be pending The divisional application must be filed within 24 months from =>

a) Voluntary division: the ED's first communication under Art. 94(3) EPC, Rule 71(1), (2), or (3) EPC in respect of the earliest application for which a communication has been issued, OR

b) Mandatory division: any ED's communication raising a (specific) objection of non-unity for the first time against the earlier application

Objective: Limitation of the possibility to use divisional applications as a tool to prolong pendency of subject-matter ("ever greening")

Reinoud Hesper 33

Amended Rules 36 and 38 EPC

Entry into force on 1 April 2014 Applicable to divisional applications filed on or after that date

Amended Rule 36(1) EPC => return to earlier wording of the rule Divisional application may be filed as long as the earlier application

(parent) is pending

Amended Rule 38 EPC => introduction of new fee element Additional fee as part of the filing fee for divisional applications of

second or subsequent generations

Concept "generation" relates to the links in a chain of divisional applications (G1/05 and G1/06, reasons 11.1) See also EPO Guidelines (A-IV, 1.1.1 - 1.1.1.4); T 1158/01

Reinoud Hesper 44

Rule 36 EPC - Reasons for revision

Aim: Reduction of the monitoring burden and costs for the users

Fact: Less precautionary filing of divisional applications G 1/09 => application refused by a decision of the ED is still pending within

the meaning of Rule 25 EPC 1973 (current Rule 36(1) EPC) until the expiry of the time limit for filing the notice of appeal

But: The filing of long sequences of divisional applications is detrimental to the European patent system => Preventing sequences of divisional applications remains a valid objective

Reinoud Hesper 55

Rule 38 EPC - Additional filing fee

"Signal" to the users => a more proportionate way to prevent sequences of divisional applications Legitimate filing strategies not affected

A moderate additional fee as part of the filing fee is due within one month from filing the divisional application (Rule 38 EPC)

First generation divisional applications will not be subject to payment of the additional fee

The level of the additional fee grows with each generation up to a certain ceiling

Reinoud Hesper 66

Rule 38 EPC - Concept of generations

Reinoud Hesper 77

The PCT at the EPOEuro-PCT applications

Share of PCT at the EPO(2012 according to origin)

50%64% 67%

58%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

EPC China-Japan-Korea

U.S. Other

PCTEuropean

PCT applications in the European phase as proportion of PCT applications in the European phase plus Euro-direct applications. Overall share: 58%.

Reinoud Hesper 8

"Equal Service Levels" as a compass

18 October 2013: President Battistelli at the Annual Meeting of the US Bar - EPO Liaison Council (report)

"Our guiding principle is to attempt to achieve Equal Service Levels between the EPC procedure and the procedure under the PCT.

The alignment of procedures and services under both treaties .... reduces complexity .... and contributes to the quality and efficiency of the EPO,

as well as enhancing value for applicant through greater transparency and simplicity."

Aligning law & practice: proposal to freeze EPO's international search fee Decision taken December 2013 in Administrative Council

Reinoud Hesper 9

Amended Rule 164 EPC (1)

As from 1 November 2014 (amended) Rule 164 EPC will enable applicants to: Obtain a search of any invention claimed in the application

documents for the European phase Upon payment of a further search fee for each further invention to be

searched "Same" as for Euro-direct applications (Rule 64 EPC)

Select for the further processing of the application any invention searched by the EPO either as

Designated/elected Office in the European phase OR As (S)ISA in the international phase

Implementation of Equal Service Levels

Reinoud Hesper 10

Amended Rule 164 EPC (2)

If the EPO was not the (S)ISA => supplementary European search may cover further searches Rule 164(1) EPC (compare Rule 64(1) EPC)

Applicants no longer bound to the (single) invention searched by the EPO as designated or elected Office upon entry into the European phase No costs for a divisional application to obtain (just) a search

If the EPO was the (S)ISA => Further searches may be obtained after the start of examination (Rule 164(2) EPC)

Applicants no longer bound to the invention(s) searched by the EPO as (S)ISA in the international phase Flexibility: postponing further searches from the international to the European

phase Avoiding (further) investments at an (too) early stage "Benefit" of European search fee

Reinoud Hesper 1111

Enhancing Chapter II PCT - Top-up search

Recent measures enabling A better decision on entry into the national/European phase If wished, fast(er) grant in the European phase

FIRST => as from 1 July 2014 a top-up search in Chapter II PCT will be performed Implementation of Rule 66.1ter PCT and Equal Service Levels No extra charge First action in Chapter II (as a rule) Covering secret and "normal" prior art (Rule 64 PCT) in alignment with

the (extended) top-up search performed in the European phase Conflicting applications (Art. 54(3) EPC) Potential conflicting applications => int. applications in international phase (Art

153(5) and Rule 165 EPC) Prior art in searches by other Offices on family members after an EPO search

Reinoud Hesper 1212

Enhancing Chapter II PCT - More dialogue

SECOND (reminder) => Since 1 October 2011 more interaction between the examiner and the applicant in the procedure before the EPO as IPEA Notice in OJ EPO 10/2011, 532

A second written opinion is issued in Chapter II procedure if The applicant filed amendments for the Chapter II procedure AND There are objections outstanding so that the IPER would be negative if issued

based on the file as it stands

The applicant may reply within the time limit set of (as a rule) two months by filing comments and (further) amendments

If the EPO acted as IPEA => 975 EURO (50%) reduction in the examination fee in the European phase Art. 14(2) Rules Relating to Fees

Reinoud Hesper 13

Acceleration - Early processing at the EPO

"Processing ban" (Art. 23(1) and 40(1) PCT) Designated/elected Offices cannot start processing an international

application during the international phase (30 months at least) => ONLY the applicant may lift the processing ban

Art. 23(2) and 40(2) PCT (J18/09, OJ EPO 2011, 480)

How to lift the processing ban in respect of the EPO to start the processing in the European phase? Submit an express request for early processing (no special form) Comply with all further requirements => precise information in

Notice of the EPO dated 21.2.2013 (OJ EPO 3/2013, 156)

Reinoud Hesper 1414

Info on PCT procedures before EPO

All PCT related information of the EPO http://www.epo.org/pct

Detailed overview of the PCT procedures before EPO "Euro-PCT Guide" (How to get a European Patent, Part II)

February 2014: publication of "Euro-PCT Guide 2014" (1.1.2014) http://www.epo.org/applying/international/guide-for-applicants.html

Content => EPO specific information concerning the EPO in its function as RO, (S)ISA, IPEA and as DO/EO

Many references to "sources" of EPC law and practice Decisions of the President, Notices of the EPO, Guidelines of the EPO, case

law

Reinoud Hesper 1515

www.epo.org

Thank you for your attention!

rhesper@epo.orgInternational_pct_affairs@epo.org