Posted by: Yen Thieu in Worldwide patent, Vietnam, prosecution, Pharmaceuticals, PCT national stage, Patents, Patent Prosecution, Patent filing, patent, novelty, law, intellectual property, examination, EPO, Drug patents, claims on
May 13, 2009
Patentability of medical use claims in Vietnam has been debated for long time. At certain points of time, a number of Vietnamese patents were granted with medical use claims (first use or second use) following the practice at EPO. However, with the advent of the Code of Intellectual Property 2005, which came into force on July 1, 2006, the question again became hotly arguing.
In applying the Code of Intellectual Property 2005, medical use claims, just like any other use claims, are rejected in Vietnam for failure to be either products or processes, and hence subject to exclusion from patent protection in the country. Patent applicants, especially those in pharmaceutical industries, and their patent agents choose to either: (1) convert the second medical use claims (Swiss type, as named
The USPTO announced on April 13, 2009, the continuation of the patent prosecution high-way (PPH) with IP Australia. The PPH with IP Australia, dated April 14, 2008, allows an applicant whose patent has been granted in IP Australia, to have the corresponding application flied in the USPTO to be advanced out of line for examination.
The PPH has been extended in order to allow the USPTO to adequately assess the feasibility or the PPH pilot program.
The PPH between the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) and the USPTO was also extended and a similar cooperation with the German patent office was declared on April 14, 2009.
Other countries participating in PPH programs with one or more other national patent offices include the European Union, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Japan, and
In a recently decided matter of Rolic AG et al vs The Controller General of Patents and The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs in respect of a national phase patent application in India, in the First Examination Report (FER) the Indian Patent Office had raised objections including (i) invention as claimed lacked in novelty for instance see International Preliminary Examination Report and documents cited therein and (ii) invention as claimed lacked in inventive merit for instance see International Preliminary Examination Report and documents cited therein.
The Applicants filed their response to the Examination Report within the prescribed timeline and submitted documents with amended claims explaining the invention and clarifying how the invention under the amended claims were
The usual time limit for entering National Phase in INDIA based on a PCT International Application is Thirty One months form the priority date.However, it is not that all National Phase applications filed in India have to wait for Thirty One months from priority to be taken up for Examination.In case any Applicant desires to proceed faster with the examination of the National Phase in India for a faster grant, there is a special provision for filing an Express Request for Examination by paying additional fees alongwith the National Phase entry in India by filing of which the Indian Patent Office will initiate examination of the aplication in India without waiting for the Thirty One month timeline to be over.Thus there is definite provision for expediting the grant in India of the
.jpg)
.jpg)
