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