Source: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2013/week53/TOCCN/item-230.htm
Timestamp: 2020-04-07 11:50:14
Document Index: 243241150

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 708', '§ 119', '§ 119', '§ 365', '§ 111', '§ 111', '§ 111']

Patent and Trademark Office Consolidated Notices December 31, 2013 1397 Item cons230
Top of Notices (230) December 31, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1397 CNOG 786
Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property
From July 2006 to January 2008, the USPTO partnered with the Japan Patent Office (JPO) to establish the first Patent Prosecution Highway pilot program (PPH). The PPH leverages accelerated examination procedures already available in both offices to allow applicants in both offices to obtain corresponding patents faster and more efficiently. The PPH also permits each office to benefit from the work previously done by the other office, in turn helping to reduce workload and improve patent quality. The USPTO and the JPO began full implementation of the PPH program on January 4, 2008.
USPTO has also commenced separate PPH pilot programs with the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO), the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), IP Australia (IPAU), the European Patent Office (EPO), the Danish Patent and Trademark Office (DKPTO), the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS), the German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), the National Board of Patents and Registration of Finland (NBPR), the Hungarian Patent Office (HPO), the Russian Patent Office (Rospatent), the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office (SPTO), and the Austrian Patent Office (APO) based on the same or similar framework as the PPH between the USPTO and JPO.
Following on these partnerships, the USPTO and the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI) have agreed to launch a PPH pilot program similar to the PPH pilot programs noted above.
Where the USPTO is the OFF and the U.S. application contains claims that are determined to be allowable/patentable, the applicant may request accelerated examination at IMPI for the corresponding application filed with IMPI as the OSF. The procedures and requirements for filing a request with IMPI for participation in the PPH pilot program will be available on March 1, 2011, from the IMPI Web site at: http://www.impi.gob.mx.
Where the USPTO is the OSF and the corresponding application filed with IMPI as the OFF contains claims that are determined to be allowable/patentable, the applicant may request participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO and request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). Note that the procedures for a petition to make special under the accelerated examination program set forth in MPEP § 708.02(a) do NOT apply to a request for expedited examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). The procedures and requirements for filing a request in the USPTO for participation in the PPH pilot program are set forth below in Section B.
The PPH pilot program will commence on March 1, 2011, for a period of one year ending on February 29, 2012. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and IMPI will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the February 29, 2012 date.
(a) a Paris Convention application that either
(i) validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with IMPI, or
(ii) validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 119(a)/365(a) to a Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) application that contains no priority claims,
(i) validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 365(b) to an application filed with IMPI, or
- U.S. application with a single Paris Convention priority claim to an application filed in Mexico (MX)
- Paris Convention and domestic priority
- Paris Convention and divisional application
- U.S. application claiming Paris Convention priority to a PCT application
- U.S. application is a national stage of a PCT application that claims Paris Convention priority to a MX application
- U.S. application is a national stage of a PCT application that claims Paris Convention priority to another PCT application
- U.S. application is a § 111(a) bypass of a PCT application that claims Paris Convention priority to a MX application
- U.S. application is a § 111(a) bypass of a PCT application that claims Paris Convention priority to another PCT application
- U.S. application is a § 111(a) bypass of a PCT application that contains no priority claim
The MX application whose claims are determined to be allowable/patentable does not have to be the application for which priority is claimed in the USPTO application (the basic application). The MX application can be an application explicitly derived from the basic application, e.g., a divisional application of the basic application. Note that where the MX application that contains the allowable/patentable claims is not the same application for which priority is claimed in the U.S. application, the applicant must identify the relationship between the MX application that contains the allowable/patentable claims and the MX priority application claimed in the U.S. application (e.g., MX application X that contains the allowable/patentable claims is a divisional application of MX application Y, which is the priority application claimed in the U.S. application).
(2) The MX application(s) must have at least one claim that was determined by the IMPI to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the MX application(s) along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the IMPI office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the IMPI office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by the IMPI.
(3) All the claims in each U.S. application for which a request for participation in the PPH pilot program is made must sufficiently correspond to or be amended to sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the MX application(s). Claims will be considered to sufficiently correspond where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format requirements, the claims are of the same or similar scope. The applicant is also required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the MX application(s).
(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A sample request form (PTO/SB/20MX) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on March 1, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).
(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the Office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from each of the MX application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the MX application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where IMPI might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).
Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the MX application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see B.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the MX application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.
February 16,2011 DAVID J. KAPPOS
[1364 OG 201]