Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2019: Expanded Scope for Expedited Examination

-

The Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2019 came into effect on September 17, 2019, introducing significant changes to the framework governing expedited examination of patent applications in India.

Rule 24(C) has been amended to expand the categories of applicants eligible for expedited examination. Previously limited to a narrow set of circumstances, the Rule now recognizes ten distinct categories under which an applicant may request expedited examination:

  1. Where India has been indicated as the International Searching Authority (ISA) or elected as the International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) in the corresponding PCT application;
  2. Where the applicant qualifies as a start-up;
  3. Where the applicant qualifies as a small entity;
  4. Where the applicant(s) is/are natural person(s), and at least one such applicant is a female;
  5. Where the applicant is a Government Department;
  6. Where the applicant is an institution established by a Central, Provincial, or State Act, and is owned or controlled by the Government;
  7. Where the applicant is a Government company;
  8. Where the applicant is an institution wholly or substantially financed by the Government;
  9. Where the invention pertains to a notified sector; or
  10. Where an arrangement exists with a foreign patent office and the applicant is eligible under such arrangement.

Notably, these provisions draw no distinction between Indian and foreign applicants—the expanded categories apply equally to both. The Rules also specify, wherever applicable, the requisite supporting documents for each category.

It is important to note that categories 9 and 10 will not take immediate effect. These will be operationalized in due course: category 9 through notifications identifying priority sectors as per policy requirements, and category 10 through the execution of reciprocal arrangements with foreign patent offices, enabling similar benefits to be extended to Indian applicants abroad.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024: What the New Flexibility Gives You — and the Hard Deadlines It Cannot Touch

-
Introduction On 15 March 2024, the Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024 came into force and quietly rewrote the rhythm of patent prosecution in India. Practitioners who had spent two decades telling clients "this deadline cannot be extended, full stop" suddenly found themselves revising standard advice: many timelines that were once immovable can now be bought back, at a price, under the liberalised Rule 138. But here lies the trap — and it is a trap that has already caught applicants who read the headlines and not the fine print. The 2024 amendments are subordinate legislation made under Section 159 of the Patents Act, 1970. They can soften only those timelines that live in the Rules . Where the Act itself fixes a period and attaches a consequence — "deemed abandoned," "deemed withdrawn," "shall not be entertained" — no Rule, however generously worded, can rescue a defaulting applicant. Only Parliament can. This article does two things. First, it wal...
Read more

Myanmar's New Trademark Law: A Shift Toward a Modern Registration System

-
On January 30, 2019, the Parliament of Myanmar passed the country's first modern Trademark Law, marking a significant step toward aligning Myanmar's intellectual property regime with international standards. This legislation will replace the existing practice—under which trademark rights are secured merely by registering a Declaration of Ownership with the Office of the Registration of Deeds—with a formal, examination-based trademark registration system. To administer this new regime, Myanmar will establish an Intellectual Property Office ("IPO") under the Ministry of Commerce. Transition for Existing Registrations Recognizing that numerous trademarks are already on record under the old declaration-based system, the IPO will introduce a "soft-opening" period, commencing in January 2020, during which owners of existing registrations may re-file their marks with the IPO. This re-filing window will remain open for six (6) months, and re-filed marks will be a...
Read more

Jurisdiction Under Section 62 of the Copyright Act and Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act: The Supreme Court's Ruling in Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia

-
The Question Before the Court In Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia , the Supreme Court was called upon to settle a recurring and commercially significant question: where a plaintiff's principal place of business is at a location where the cause of action has also arisen, can the plaintiff nonetheless choose to sue at a different place — typically the location of a branch office — merely because it also carries on business there? The Court answered this decisively in the negative, holding that Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 must be construed purposively, and that a plaintiff residing or carrying on business at a place where the cause of action has also wholly or partly arisen must institute the suit at that place. The Statutory Scheme Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure ordinarily determines where a suit may be filed: under clauses (a) and (b), at a place where the defendant resides or carries on busin...
Read more