Webinar Recap – China IP Trends: The Shift in Patent Filing

No comments yet

On June 28th, RWS and Managing IP presented a webinar of the topic ‘China IP Trends: The Shift in Patent Filing’. Guest Speaker Justin Simpson of RWS (founder of inovia) reviewed filing data and trends from WIPO, comparing Chinese filing data to statistics from Japan and the US and predicted how filing statistics may look over the next 5-10 years. Simpson introduced fellow guest speaker Xia Zheng, founder and president of AFD China Intellectual Property, with a Q&A of what the figures mean for IP owners outside of China. Zheng discussed important strategies for filing in China including types of patents, enforcement options as well as tips for filers based on Zheng’s vast experience in the industry.

The webinar concluded with two case studies prepared by AFD China and gave listeners a chance to hear real-life solutions to filing problems. During the Q&A period, audience members asked questions directly to Zhang and Simpson. We have received excellent feedback from attendees who specified that the information provided will help them as they file into China.

If you were not able to join us for the webinar, you can watch the recording here or  you can receive the slides here.

RWS is one of the largest foreign filing providers in the world. Our clients include the corporate intellectual property (IP) departments of major multinationals, as well as leading firms of patent attorneys.

Our model is simple: we combine technology, world class translations and a global network of foreign associates to create value for our clients. inovia offers a “one-stop shop” experience so that our clients can save both time and money on foreign filing work. Click here to get your free inovia account today.

Please contact your local RWS office if you would like more information about filing in China.

New Filing Countries: Sri Lanka and Mongolia

No comments yet

Sri Lanka

RWS is pleased to announce that it now offers PCT and Direct Filing options for Sri Lanka through Kan & Krishme of our global agent network.

For applicants interested in filing in Sri Lanka, the following are some important notes:

PCT

  • PCT national stage deadline for Sri Lanka is 30 months after the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in English.
  • Powers of Attorney and Assignments are required.
  • The Powers of Attorney and Assignments do not require notarization or legalization.

Direct Filing

  • The deadline for filing the application in Sri Lanka is 12 months from the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in English.
  • Powers of Attorney and Assignments are required.
  • The Powers of Attorney and Assignments do not require notarization or legalization.
  • A certified copy of the priority document and its notarized English translation (in the case of non-English language) are required to be filed at the time of filing the application.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________________________________________________________

Mongolia

RWS is proud to announce that it now offers PCT and Direct Filing options for Mongolia through Patentmark (Mongolia) of our global agent network.

For applicants interested in filing in Mongolia, the following are some important notes:

PCT

  • PCT national stage deadline for Mongolia is 31 months after the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in Mongolian.
  • Powers of Attorney, Assignments and Inventor’s Declaration are required. Scanned color copies of documents are accepted.
  • The Powers of Attorney and Assignments do not require notarization or legalization.
  • Excess claims fees: USD 10 per claim over 5.

Direct Filing

  • The deadline for filing the application in Mongolia is 12 months from the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in Mongolian.
  • Powers of Attorney, Assignments and Inventor’s Declaration are required.
  • A certified copy of the Priority Documents is required to be filed within three months of filing the application. Scanned color copies of documents are accepted.

If you are planning on filing in Sri Lanka or Mongolia you can get an instant “1-click” quote today through our innovia portal! Click here to register now.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________________________________________________________

New Filing Countries: Angola, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan

No comments yet

Angola & Ethiopia

RWS is proud to announce the addition of both Angola and Ethiopia to our foreign patent filing capabilities through Spoor & Fisher of our global agent network. Delivering exceptional value to their clients through registering and protecting their IP across all of Africa, Spoor & Fisher now offers PCT filing options for Angola and Direct Filing options for Ethiopia.

For those applicants interested in filing in these countries, the following are some important notes:

Angola (PCT):

  • The deadline for filing the application in Angola is 30 months from the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in Portuguese.
  • Assignments are not required.
  • Powers of Attorney are required to be notarized and legalized at an Angolan consulate. An executed Power of Attorney can be filed within two months from the filing date of the application.
  • Translation extensions are available for non-English language translations; however, English translations must be filed by the deadline. No additional fee.

Ethiopia (Direct Filing):

  • The deadline for filing the application in Ethiopia is 12 months from the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in English.
  • Powers of Attorney and Assignments are required.
  • Power of Attorney forms must be notarized and legalized at an Ethiopian consulate. This can be filed within one month of filing the application.
  • Assignments must be notarized and legalized at an Ethiopian consulate.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Kazakhstan

RWS now offers PCT filing for Kazakhstan through Papula-Nevinpat of our global agent network. Established in 1975, Papula-Nevinpat has offices across nine countries, including Finland, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

For applicants interested in filing in Kazakhstan, the following are some important notes:

  • PCT national stage deadline for Kazakhstan is 31 months after the earliest priority date.
  • The application must be filed in Russian.
  • Assignments are not required
  • The original executed Power of Attorney can be filed within two months from the 31-month deadline. No notarization or legalization required.
  • Translation must be provided within two months from the filing date.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

If you are considering filing in either Angola, Ethiopia or Kazakhstan, you can get an instant “1-click” quote through our inovia portal. Register here and start today!

China IP trends webinar: Join us on June 28th

No comments yet

Join RWS and Managing IP for our webinar China IP Trends: The Shift in Patent Filing, as we look at the data and give you tips to stay ahead of your competitors. Guest Speakers Justin Simpson of RWS (founder of inovia) and Xia Zheng, founder and president of AFD China Intellectual Property, will review trends from WIPO and discuss important strategies for filing in China. Topics include some of the advantages of the system and common mistakes that even experienced filers fall victim to. Click here to register.

Don’t want to wait until June 28th to find out more? Justin recently had his article Reading Between the Lines: Patent Filing in China published. Click here to read more.

Reading Between the Lines: Patent Filing in China

No comments yet

Justin Simpson of RWS explains recent filing trends in China and outlines why if the rest of the world can’t beat China, it should join it.

Fluctuations in market trends and domestic policies can cause dramatic shifts in the intellectual property landscape year after year, making it difficult to track considerations beyond one’s own borders. Analysing the context of relevant data and identifying key marketplace indicators, such as filing trends, can help guide decisions of where to focus attention and resources. Markets indicating decline or even stability should not be ignored, but markets indicating consistent growth deserve a second look with respect to how they factor into long-term IP strategy.

Consider the example of China, which has posted stable growth for the past 10 years. In 2017, China surpassed Japan as the number two patent cooperation treaty (PCT) filer according to recent data published by the World IP Organization (WIPO). With 48,882 PCT applications filed, China now trails only the US, which filed 56,624 applications in 2017.

In the last decade, China has never posted PCT application totals less than 13 percent over the prior year, and its 2017 numbers reflect a nearly 700 percent increase over its 2008 filings. The greatest changes in percentage filed over prior year during that 10-year stretch occurred in 2010 and 2016, in which China posted 56 percentage—12,301 (2010) over 7,900 (2009)—and 44 percent increases—43,091(2016) over 29,838 (2015).

In part, China has modelled its strategy after another one of the most successful patent-filing nations in the world—Japan. When two Japanese companies have a patent fight they do not get into the minutiae of the breadth of the claims of patents. Instead, they say, for example, you have 845 granted patents, we have 950 granted patents, therefore you need to pay us royalties on the difference. In Japan, with patent portfolios, size does matter and the company with the biggest portfolio wins. China’s aim to become the world’s largest patent filer is based not just upon the inherent status of such a claim, but upon the associated commercial bargaining power it brings.

Looking at the data, it is clear that 2010 was a turning point for China in terms of filing. Both 2010 and 2016 were outliers for growth in filings relative to the other years since 2008. You may remember that the third revision of China’s Patent Law, also known as China’s National Intellectual Property Strategy, was released in June 2008, adopted in December 2008, and took effect in October 2009. The third revision saw the change from domestic (relative) disclosure to international (absolute) disclosure, the cutting back of avenues for “patent hijacking” and the encouragement of Chinese residents to file abroad. As reflected in the sudden growth of PCT filings during the 2008-2010 timeframe, the newly placed importance on international awareness was not lost on China’s IP holders. Growth in recent years has been unwisely written off by some outsiders as artificial; this is a dangerous assumption to rely upon given the observed data trends.

The relevancy of PCT application filings trends should not be understated. Simply looking at the raw output of a country’s IP authority in terms of domestic IP filings paints an incomplete picture of that country’s participation on the international stage and strong IP is rarely confined to the country from which it originated. While an application on its own is not necessarily an indicator of quality, it does demonstrate a high level of confidence in one’s IP, especially when considering cost and time commitments. China is set to become the number one filer of PCT applications in the next three years. For those outside of China, it is increasingly important that you secure your rights there, as the flow of interdependency between securing priority and developing business continues to grow in China’s direction. From a high-level overview, one should consider three key takeaways: understand the process, amend when you can and the importance of translation quality.

Understanding the system

While parts of China’s reformed approach to patent law are borrowed from Japan, others, such as the application process, more closely mirror that of the European model. To start an application in China you can either file directly via a Paris Convention filing within your 12-month priority period or a PCT application entering China at the 30-month date (with a 2-month grace period for translations). Within three years of the priority date, you must request examination, with options for voluntary amendments and then office actions are issued until grant or rejection.

You have opportunities at two points in the above process to amend your patent and you should carefully consider using both of them given the fair basis rules, which closely align with European patent law and differ quite greatly from the US process. The first opportunity comes when you request examination and the second lasts three months from notice that substantive examination has begun. It is imperative that you use these opportunities to your advantage and carefully review whether you need to amend or not; doing so after the fact will be extremely difficult.

You will also want to consider translations and the problems they can present. Before you even start the filing process, you will want to ensure that any relevant foreign-language prior art is accurately translated, including translations for foreign competitor patent claims. While machine translations can serve as a functional starting point, a poor translation can severely hinder the timeliness of your filing. Differences between languages are often technically complex and errors quickly compound, given most patents are already technically complex in subject matter. For example China does not use articles such as ‘a’ or ‘the’, and no distinction is made between singular and plural nouns. Word for word translations between English and Chinese can result in a translation that does not read properly, and in the other direction, too much subjectivity can stray from the intent of the source document. A literal approach of conveying meaning without broadening the scope of patent, striking a balance between the obvious challenges, is preferred. Improper translations are one of the most common barriers to timely securing IP rights outside of your native country.

Looking forward

With the rapid pace at which Chinese patent applications are being filed, how do the rest of us compete?

One approach is filing a very narrow sets of claims. This results not only in faster prosecution and grant, but also allows three or four applications to be filed for an invention that could quite comfortably sit in one broad set of claims. This also builds out your patent portfolio in size, impressing both investors and competitors alike.

A helpful question to ask might be: would the CEO of your competitor be more impressed that you held 50 granted patents or five very broad patents?

While an IP practitioner who toiled for many hours crafting a perfect claims set might find it crude, the commercial reality is that 10 narrow patents are valued more highly than two very broad patents.

Or perhaps you should consider a strategy used by Kia Silverbrook, one of the most prolific inventors of all time. According to former in-house counsel, one such strategy utilised by Silverbrook was to file 300-page priority documents covering an array of inventions, and then comb through that for specific inventions, filing as many divisional applications as possible. Once again, the commercial realities of the marketplace simply do not wait for creativity and inspiration. Find a strategy that works and use it.

For the rest of the world watching China’s IP acceleration this is the takeaway: we cannot beat them, so we might as well join them. Even more, you need to understand both what they are doing and how to operate within their system. The numbers do not lie—if you have not been paying attention to what China is doing, you should be, because it is working for them, and it can work for you too. IPPro

“For the rest of the world watching China’s IP acceleration this is the takeaway: we cannot beat them, so we might as well join them.” – Justin Simpson, RWS

To read more, click here for IPPro Patents issue #56.

The European Patent Office 2017 Annual Report Highlights

No comments yet

The European Patent Office (EPO) recently published their 2017 Annual Report[1] which gave a summary of interesting patent statistics from the last year and showed how they compare to previous years. The EPO was founded in 1973 – it comprises of 38 European member states, two European extension states and four Validation states.

In 2017, the number of European patent filings increased by 4.4% to 310,784 – 78% of these filings were for PCT and 22% of them were Direct Filing. The number of patent applications also increased by 3.9% to 165,590 – the top three technical fields were Medical Technology, Digital Communication and Computer Technology.

In terms of origin of the applications, 27% of them came from Europe (led by Germany, France and Switzerland), 22% were from the US, 18% from Japan. A few countries saw a particularly large increase in applications – China increased by 16.6%, Denmark increased by 13.1% and Austria increased by 8.2%.

For the first time, the European Patent Office published more than 100,000 granted European patents. In the past two years, this number has increased by 50.3%, showing that Europe is considered more than ever a leading technology market.

 

[1] European Patent Office