Patent Prosecution Highway Status Report and PPH metrics PCT MIA Canberra, February 2012 Milena...

Patent Prosecution Highway Status Report and PPH metrics PCT MIA

Canberra, February 2012

Milena LonatiPrincipal Director Quality ManagementEuropean Patent Office

Eugen StohrDirector International Legal Affairs, PCTEuropean Patent Office

2/11

• Bilateral PPH pilot between the USPTO and the EPO– launch date 29 September 2008– http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/official-journal/information-epo/archive/20120118.html

• Bilateral PPH pilot between the JPO and the EPO– launch date 29 January 2010– http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/official-journal/information-epo/archive/20120118a.html

• Trilateral PCT PPH pilot – launch date 29 January 2010– http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/official-journal/information-epo/archive/20120119.html

• Extension and revision of EPO PPH pilot programmes – effective 29 January 2012 – all pilot programmes operational until 28 January 2014 – expansion of eligibility scope: implementation of MOTTAINAI – promotion of efficiency: implementation of self-certification of claims

PPH: the EPO pilots - current status

3/11

• JPO proposal "MOTTAINAI" : relaxation of priority requirements – so far PPH schemes based on OFF - OSF workflow– shift to OEE - OLE workflow, de-linking priority– eligibility of PPH request would depend on availability of work from a

participating office on a patent family member, regardless of • order of filing • of whether the office which provides work results is the OFF

– TIMING of EXAMINATION is crucial

• USPTO proposal "PPH 2.0": next-generation PPH framework aiming at streamlining/liberalising PPH requirements– Builds on MOTTAINAI and simplifies requirements

• relaxation of the applicable PPH documentation requirements involving inter alia the increased use of DAS and machine translation,

• harmonisation of claim correspondence concept, self-certification of claims

• establishment of a common framework to replace bilateral PPH arrangements

PPH: latest developments and future plans

4/11

• Trend: harmonisation/simplification of participation/eligibility requirements → development of a uniform, all-inclusive PPH scheme

• Issue of Quality and the potential development of a Quality Management System for PPH offices now explicitly being addressed in international discussions

• Increased use of the PCT PPH– in particular as regards work products issued by the EPO: JPO received

286 requests where EPO = ISA//IPEA; USPTO received 621 requests where EPO = ISA/IPEA (status: January 2012)

– makes PCT international phase work products (i.e. WO/ISA, IPER) a key element of global work sharing

– underlines the philosophy behind the PCT– EPO is exploring conclusion of PCT PPH arrangements with further

ISAs, in particular KIPO/SIPO

PPH: latest developments and future plans

5/11

Envisaged implementation

PPH filing at the EPO has been at a moderate level

PPH: the EPO pilots - participation figures

PPH pilot programme Requests filed at the EPO Eligible requests

Trilateral PCT - PPH (launch 29.01.2010)

209 199

Bilateral JPO – EPO (launch 29.01.2010)

394 373

Bilateral USPTO - EPO (launch 29.09.2008, revised

from 29.01.2010)

254 182

TOTAL 857 754

6/11

PPH Scheme EPO JPO USPTO Other

PCT-PPH 5.2% 27.8% 66.6% 0.4%

Bilateral PPH 4.4% 14.0% 48.6% 33.0% (of which Canada=15.6%, KIPO=11.7%)

PPH Scheme EPO JPO USPTO Other

PCT-PPH 30.4% 36.8% 3.2% 29.6% (of which KIPO=25.6%)

Bilateral PPH 1.6% 51.5% 33.1% 13.8% (of which KIPO=8.2%, UKIPO=1.8%)

(a) OSF percentage share of worldwide PPH filings

(b) OFF percentage share of worldwide PPH filings

PPH filings in the global context (at end June 2011) [1]

[1] Data from the PPH portal statistics site, 4 November 2011.http://www.jpo.go.jp/cgi/cgi-bin/ppph-portal/statistics/statistics.cgi

7/11

Envisaged implementation PPH: the EPO pilots - participation figures

16%

82%

8/11

Envisaged implementation PPH: the EPO pilots - number of PPH requests per month

16%

82%

9/11

Envisaged implementation PPH: the EPO pilots - technology area distribution

16%

82%

10/11

PPH pilot programme

Eligible requests Number of processed files at EPO to date

% positive EPO written opinions

Trilateral PCT-PPH

125 57 9%

Bilateral JPO-EPO

296 190 7%

Bilateral USPTO-EPO

104 55 4%

Overall 525 302 7%

PPH: the EPO pilots - outcome of first action

11/11

Population(Date of entry to regional phase >= 29.01.2010)

% with only A citations in ISR

% of the EPO searches citing no additional X, Y or E documents

PCT-PPH files with first action in European phase

75% 35%

Non-PPH accelerated search reference population weighted by ISA to match the above PCT-PPH population

33% 26%

PPH: File selection effect when filing for PPH

12/11

PPH: Pendency to first action

Population (Date of entry to regional phase >= 29.01.2010).The start date of the pendency calculation is in brackets.

Number of applications

Average pendency to first action in days

All PPH files with a first action (PPH request date) 302 143

Euro-PCT bis files with ISA JPO or USPTO from all PPH programmes with a first action (PPH request date)

199 156

Non-PPH Euro-PCT bis files with ISA JPO or USPTO and accelerated search requested and European supplementary search completed (date of request for accelerated search)

499 188

13/11

• Eligible PCT-PPH requests

– All claims at the OFF: 14.2

– Patentable claims at the OFF: 12.8

– Claims in the PPH filing at the EPO: 11.8

• Eligible JPO-EPO bilateral PPH programme requests

– All claims at the JPO: 8.9

– Patentable claims at the JPO: 8.8

– Claims in the PPH filing at the EPO: 8.7

• Eligible USPTO-EPO bilateral PPH programme requests

– All claims at the USPTO: 16.4

– Patentable claims at the USPTO: 16.4

– Claims in the PPH filing at the EPO: 11.8

Average Number of Claims by PPH Programme

14/11

PPH Evaluation: preliminary examiners' feedback

• 44% of responding examiners have cited at least some of the art or a family member listed by OFF

• 23% state that the work provided by the OFF was useful or very useful (38% PCT-PPH and 19% bilateral PPH files)

• In 13% of all responses, examiners state that having OFF work results made processing of the application efficient or very efficient: (24% PCT-PPH and 10% bilateral PPH files).

• 56% of users of the JP-EN machine translation found it to be at least 'usable'.

15/11

Need more information?

www.epo.org

Thank you for your attention