China & Taiwan Implement Mutual Recognition of Priority Rights
Posted on Monday, January 17, 2011
By Werner Chiu, NAIP Patent Research & Jeffrey Chang, NAIP Editorial
Since ECFA and the cross-strait IPR agreement were signed in September, many have wondered when the goals and frameworks established would become reality. But since many political, administrative and even logistical issues had yet to discussed, many were surprised when only two short months later on 11 November 2010, when China's State Intellectual Property Office of China (SIPO) and Taiwan's Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) announced the implementation of mutual priority rights recognition for patents and trademarks.
The announcement formally went into effect on 22 November 2010 and applicants may now file invention, utility model or design patents and trademarks at SIPO, claiming priority from a TIPO application, and vice versa. Priority can be claimed from applications filed on or after September 12th, the date the IPR agreement was signed.
Previous Regulations
      Prior  to the announcement, neither TIPO nor SIPO accepted  applications claiming  priority from the other office. TIPO regulations  were:
If the applicant is a national of the People's Republic of China, no matter which country the claimed application is filed in, priority claims not be processed.
If the claimed application is an application at SIPO, no matter the nationality of the application, priority claims will not be processed. The only exception would be if the application is a PCT application that originated from China.
These two regulations have now been cancelled.
SIPO's regulations were similar. If a claimed application was a TIPO application, no matter the nationality of the applicant, the priority claim would be rejected. The regulation was amended on 19 November 2010 to allow Taiwan applications, albeit with limitations in application procedure and format.
Dates & Time Limits
      Applications filed at TIPO and SIPO on or after 22 November  2010 are eligible  to claim priority on applications filed on or after  12 September 2010. 
Time limits for priority claims are the same as those set in the Paris Convention: twelve months for patents and utility models, and six months for industrial designs and trademarks.
Deadlines to submit relevant documents (i.e. copies of application): 3 months for SIPO applications; 4 months for TIPO
Fees
      Priority  Claim Fee: SIPO – 80RMB fee. Failure to submit the complete amount will be  construed as no claim
TIPO – No additional fee
Special Regulations
      In  addition to some procedural and regulatory differences,  due to the complex  political situation, SIPO has specifically  introduced rules with regards to  applications.
           Assignment of Priority Rights
      SIPO  – A single or multiple priority claims can be  relinquished. However, all  applicants must consent via a signed or  stamped statement.
           Restoration of Lost Priority  Claims
      SIPO  – Lost priority claims may be recovered if: 1) Loss was  due to failure to submit requested materials within specified time  limit. 2) At least one item is filled correctly in the declaration  claiming priority, however a  copy of the TIPO application, evidence of  transfer of priority claims rights or relevant statement have not been  provided within the prescribed time limit. 3)  At least one item is  filled correctly in the declaration claiming priority, however, the fee  was not paid or not paid in full within the prescribed time limit. 4) A  divisional application's original application has claimed priority of a  TIPO application.
           Conflicting  Phrases/Words
      SIPO - If any phrases, words  deemed contrary to any laws or  regulations (i.e. Republic of China, the Country  of Taiwan, etc….)  appear in the application, SIPO will request the applicant  make  amendments. If satisfactory amendments are not made within 2 months, the   application will be rejected! If the phrases are deemed not relevant  to the  technical aspects of the application, SIPO may delete words of  phrases of its  own accord and is not required to notify the applicant.
           Non-disclosure  of Address
      SIPO - An applicant may choose to not publicly disclose  his address and instead list "China, Taiwan".
Benefits  & Conclusion
      Implementation of mutual priority  rights now  provides  applicants with more time and leeway in deciding when to file and can   reduce risk of rejection. Previously, when filing for applications at  SIPO and  TIPO, an applicant would have to apply to both offices  simultaneously to ensure  an application would not be rejected due to  prior art claims. However this involved the risk that the applicant  would be in contravention of China Patent Law Article 20 regarding  confidentiality examinations. These issues existed in  addition to  increased costs.
After implementation, applicants can now first file in China and request a confidentiality examination, and then after approval of confidentiality examination, file in Taiwan claiming priority of the SIPO application.
Read more...


 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
