Draft Patents (Amendment) Rules 2013

Indian Patent Office (IPO) has recently published Draft Patents (Amendment) Rules 2013 and has invited comments (objections or suggestions) from the public within 45 days from the publication of the notification (12th June 2013).

The main changes proposed are the following:

1. There is a 100% hike in official fees for almost all the proceedings before the Controller, as stated in First Schedule.

For example, the filing fee has increased from ₹ 1000 (~USD 20) to ₹ 2000 (~ 40) for a natural person and from ₹ 4000 (~ USD 80) to ₹ 8000 (~USD 160) for a legal entity. Fee for each additional claim and sheet have also doubled from ₹ 200 (~USD 4) to ₹ 400 (~ USD 8) per claim (for a natural person) and from ₹ 800 (~USD 16)to ₹ 1600 (~USD 32) per claim (for a legal entity).

The fees for filing request for the examination have also doubled from ₹ 2500 to ₹ 5000 for a natural person and from IN 10,000 (~USD 200) to ₹ 20,000 (~ USD 400) for a legal entity.

So is the fee for filing amendment of the application before and after grant.

The Transmittal fee for PCT application has also doubled from ₹ 2000 (natural person) and ₹ 8000 (legal entity) to ₹ 4000 ₹ INR 16000 respectively. So is the fee for requesting certified copies of the priority documents.

The renewal fees for all years are doubled too.

In fact, out of the entire schedule 2, there are only about 3-4 proceedings for which fees have not increased. For example,

  • application for filing Compulsory licence under 84(1), 91(1), 92(1), 92A, and
  • application for filing revocation of a patent under 85(1). [This application is for revocation of a patent for which compulsory licence has been granted and 2 years have elapsed from such date of grant of the compulsory licence and the patent has either not been worked in the territory of India, or reasonable requirements of public are not met or the patented invention is not available to the public at a reasonably affordable price.]
  • filing request for early publication under 11A(2)

2. In addition to a fee hike, there would be an additional surcharge of 10% on all official fees when a patent application and other documents are filed in hard copies. [new proviso in Rule 7(1)].

3. Pre-Grant Opposition would now be filed in Form 7 (A). At present, there is no form for filing Pre-grant opposition. Pre-grant opposition can be filed on just a plain sheet of paper. [amendment to Rule 55(1)].

4. There would be an additional surcharge of 10% on the costs awarded in certain proceedings before the Controller, as stated in the Fourth Schedule when the documents are filed in hard copies.

Remarks

The surcharge on physical filing will promote more of e-filing which is a welcome move by the IPO. This should decrease the paper burden on the IPO and in turn increase efficiency. Even in foreign patent offices like USPTO, there is a surcharge on physical filing. On another hand, a 100% fee hike could have been lessened. This fee hike would not be welcomed especially by Indian individual inventors, academic institutions and the like. On a separate note, the IPO’s fees were seen as one of the lowest official fees and such a fee hike may not likely impact the foreign filings in India much.

Follow us on Twitter: @KnKIPLaw

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

18 − 10 =

Archives

  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010