The African Intellectual Property Organization, officially the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OAPI), is a regional intellectual property organization and office comprising 17 member states across the African region.
Established on September 13, 1962, the OAPI is headquartered in Yaoundé, Cameroon, and encompases the member states of Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, the Comoros, the Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Chad and Togo. It operates under the revised Bangui Agreement of 1999 and 2015 with the primary objective of facilitating a unified and streamlined system for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights across its member states. In doing so, the Office helps to foster innovation, creativity, and economic development across the region. Moreover, the centralization of IP administration by the OAPI ensures that applicants and rights holders can secure and manage their IP efficiently and uniformly across member states.
The OAPI offers a wide range of services to facilitate the registration and protection of various forms of intellectual property, including patents, trademarks, industrial designs, and geographical indications, among others. By providing a single application process that grants IP protection in all member states, the OAPI significantly reduces the administrative load and costs associated with obtaining IP rights in multiple jurisdictions individually.
This system not only simplifies the process for applicants but also ensures a consistent application of IP laws and standards across the region, promoting legal certainty and stability for businesses and individual inventors. Owing to the fact that all OAPI member states are governed by the common law set forth by the Bangui Agreement, it is not possible to designate certain member states for IP protection. Consequently, an OAPI registered right will be valid in all member states simultaneously.
In addition to facilitating a system for regional IP rights, the OAPI also allows for several initiatives and international collaborations with the aim of raising awareness and providing education to all stakeholders alike regarding the importance of intellectual property. As such, the organization conducts and hosts several training programs, workshops, and seminars aimed at enhancing the skill set and capacity of IP professionals, officials, applicants and the general public. These initiatives are an important element in the maintenance of a robust IP system in the African region, helping to cultivate a stable basis for the protection of innovation and subsequent economic upturn.
The OAPI also collaborates with multiple international organizations, including the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), in order to align its interests and actions with global best practices and legal framework. Additionally, the OAPI is a party to both the Hague Agreement and the Madrid Protocol, allowing for the international registration of various IP types within the regional organization. Such collaborations can prove vital in forging an effective IP system for the region, also encouraging applicants from across the world to file for IP protection in OAPI member states.
The OAPI plays a pivotal role in supporting economic development by encouraging foreign investment and global IP applications. By providing a reliable system for the protection of an applicant's IP portfolio, the OAPI assists in facilitating an attractive environment for investors who seek to capitalize on the region's growth potential. This is due to the fact that secure and enforceable IP rights are essential for companies looking to establish operations in Africa, protecting their innovations and brand identity from infringement. Furthermore, the promotion of IP rights in the region also helps to provide for the commercialization of local innovations and the development of new industries, contributing to further economic growth and an increase in employment opportunities.
Overall, the OAPI is instrumental in advancing intellectual property protection across the African region, fostering innovation across its 17 member states through a centralized IP system, harmonized IP laws, and the facilitation of training in regards to the IP field. In providing a cohesive system for the protection of IP rights, the OAPI also acts as a catalyst for economic development in the region.
|
Managing the lifecycle of a patent, from the initial filing of a PCT application to maintaining its validity for 20 years or more, can be complex and resource-intensive. IP-Coster simplifies this process, offering a centralized platform to handle every stage of patent prosecution and protection efficiently. With our support, clients can focus on innovation while we manage the details.
The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) enables applicants to file a single patent application, which can then enter national or regional phases to seek protection in up to 158 countries and regions. However, the PCT does not provides a single “international patent”. Instead, it streamlines the process of obtaining separate national or regional patents.
Filing traditional PCT application involves several steps: preparing documents, obtaining necessary signatures, and submitting physical copies to a receiving office. This process can be time-consuming, especially when coordinating with legal representatives and handling extensive paperwork.
Simplifying PCT Filing with IP-Coster
IP-Coster’s platform eliminates these hurdles by offering a centralized, user-friendly solution. Our experienced attorneys handle the entire PCT application process online, ensuring timely submission to any of the 89 available receiving offices. We manage all communication digitally, eliminating the need for physical paperwork and reducing administrative overhead.
Entering National or Regional Phases
Under the PCT agreement, applicants must transition their applications into the national or regional phases to seek patent protection in specific jurisdictions. This step typically occurs within 30 or 31 months from the earliest priority date, depending on the regulations of each country or region.
Navigating this phase requires tailored strategies for each jurisdiction. At IP-Coster, our team helps clients select the best options for their needs, ensuring a smooth transition and increasing the likelihood of successful patent grants.
Managing Independent Prosecution in Each Jurisdiction
During national or regional phases, patent prosecution proceeds independently in each chosen jurisdiction. IP-Coster partners with a global network of trusted agents to provide professional and reliable representation for our clients, ensuring compliance with local legal and procedural requirements.
Our platform allows clients to manage their intellectual property seamlessly across multiple jurisdictions, all within the same intuitive interface they used to begin their patent journey. From filing to grant, IP-Coster supports clients every step of the way.
Maintaining Patent Validity
Once patents are granted, maintaining their validity requires the timely payment of annuities in each jurisdiction. This ongoing obligation is essential to ensure that the rights conferred by the patent remain secure.
Through IP-Coster, clients can manage annuity payments efficiently, reducing administrative complexity and minimizing the risk of missed deadlines. This ensures patents remain secure while clients focus on leveraging their intellectual property.
Extending Patent Terms
In certain industries, such as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, patents may be eligible for term extensions to compensate for time lost during regulatory approval processes. These extensions can add up to five years to the standard 20-year patent term, depending on specific criteria and jurisdictional regulations. Each case requires a thorough assessment to determine eligibility for such extensions.
At IP-Coster, our experienced professionals are ready to evaluate your unique situation and guide you through the process of securing potential patent term extensions, ensuring that your intellectual property enjoys the maximum protection available.
|
Patent priority rights play a pivotal role in the protection process for inventions, however, securing and maintaining such priority rights can be complex. Patent applicants can find themselves unintentionally losing the priority right to their invention due to unforeseen circumstances, and whilst it may not be ideal, there are solutions that could lead to their reinstatement in certain situations.
Application
Patent priority rights grant applicants an exclusive right to file for patent protection for their invention based upon an earlier application filed by the applicant. Priority rights are facilitated in multiple areas through international treaties such as the Paris Convention and the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), for example.
Some jurisdictions allow for the reinstatement of patent priority rights if the failure to meet deadlines and subsequent lapse of priority was due to "due care", or if the lapse of priority was due to "unintentionality." These jurisdictions typically include countries that adhere to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, however, specific criteria and procedures for reinstatement vary by jurisdiction. Due to the nuanced nature of priority restoration, it is crucial to consult the patent laws and regulations of each country for detailed information on the requirements and process for reinstatement of priority rights.
As per the PCT, in instances whereby a patent application possesses an international filing date later than the date the priority period lapsed, the applicant may request restoration of priority if done so within two months from the initial expiration date and if the Office finds that the correct criteria apply.
Grounds for reinstatement
Due Care
One available route for the restoration of priority is by applying for reinstatement based upon due care criteria. In the sphere of patent priority rights, due care refers to the level of responsibility and diligence expected from patent applicants in managing their applications and complying with relevant regulations and obligations. There are generally strict criteria which must be met in order to obtain reinstatement of a priority right via due care grounds.
If a lapse of priority is deemed to have occurred in spite of due care that a “reasonably prudent applicant would have taken” in the patent application process, the priority rights may be restored for an applicant by an IP Office.
In order to meet the standards for due care criteria for the reinstatement of priority rights, patent applicants must demonstrate that they have met a series of high standards as it is not sufficient for an applicant to simply demonstrate that they had generally taken precautions to adhere to time limits, for example.
Instead, the applicant should demonstrate that they exercised complete due care for the entire application, with the Receiving Office assessing all factual elements of the applicant's actions pertaining to the filing of the international application up to the expiration of the priority period. Any actions taken by the applicant after the expiration of the priority period will not be taken into consideration when determining whether the applicant took all actions necessary to demonstrate due care.
Due Care Criteria
The criteria that will typically be examined by an IP Office in order to establish that an applicant took all due care in order to reinstate a priority right include:
1. Lack of Knowledge by the Applicant
2. Lack of Financing by the Applicant
3. Human Error by the Applicant or Agent Himself
4. Miscommunication between the Applicant and the Agent
5. Absence from the Office by the Applicant or Agent
6. Human Error by the Agent’s or Applicant’s Staff
7. Docketing System Error
8. Facsimile or Software Submission Failure
9. Postal Service Difficulties
10. Force Majeure
The IP Office will factually analyze each of these criteria in accordance with the requirements and in comparison to what actions they would deem a “prudent applicant” would have made in order to have complied with the due care criteria.
Unintentionality
The Unintentionality Criterion is another possible route for the reinstatement of priority rights, and overall the requirements for the meeting of such criteria are less stringent than those needed to prove due care was taken by an applicant.
Overall, a Receiving Office should restore a priority right if it is found that any failings on behalf of the applicant to file the international application within the set priority period was unintentional. In order to meet this criteria, an applicant must be able to demonstrate that they did not deliberately refrain from filing the international application within the priority period and that they had every underlying intention to file within the priority period.
Unintentionality Criteria
Some of the most common circumstances that apply for the unintentionality ground for reinstatement of priority include:
1. Lack of awareness
2. Misunderstanding of the law
3. Reliance on incorrect information
In essence, the focus on whether the applicant should meet the unintentionality criteria or not should lay upon the Receiving Office’s assessment as to the applicant's intent at the expiration of the priority period, regardless of their intent before or after the priority period.
Statement of Reasons
Whether an applicant intends to rely on the due care or the unintentionality criteria in order to apply for the reinstatement of priority rights, the applicant is required to set forth to the Receiving Office the reasons why the application was not filed within the established period. These reasons should be submitted in the form of a “Statement of Reasons.”
With regard to said statement in relation to the due care criterion, it should contain a detailed description of all facts and circumstances that amounted to the late filing of the international application past the priority expiration. Further, the statement of reasons in relation to due care grounds for reinstatement should also depict any remedial steps or alternative remedies that the applicant sought in an attempt to file the application within the priority period.
If the grounds for reinstatement are based upon the unintentionality criterion, the statement of reasons should detail that any failure to comply and submit the international application within the assigned priority period was entirely not intentional. Should the Receiving Office not find the statement of reasons sufficient, they may invite the applicant to submit a revised statement.
Moreover, supporting evidence will assist alongside the Statement of Reasons in demonstrating that the lapse of priority for an applicant should be reinstated based on either the due care criteria, or the unintentionality criteria.
Overall, reinstatement of priority owing to grounds of due care is a more strict criterion that focuses on the proactive measures taken by individuals or entities to prevent intellectual property infringement, whilst the unintentionality criterion is typically more flexible.
In amongst the nuances of priority reinstatement regulations, there is hope for applicants who may have lost patent priority rights. If you are interested in learning more about the possibilities of reinstating patent priority rights, or if you would like our assistance with your matter, contact us via our social media or website at https://www.ip-coster.com!
|
The Eurasian Patent Organization and Office (EAPO) is an intergovernmental organization founded in 1995 with the aim of promoting the development and protection of intellectual property across the region, in accordance with the Eurasian Patent Convention (EPC). The EPC was first signed on September 9, 1994 and entered into force on August 12 of the following year, formally establishing the EAPO.
Member states to the EAPO include countries from both the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and non-CIS countries, fostering international collaboration in the field of IP. These Member States in 2024 include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. The EAPO headquarters are located in Russia with the official language of the Office being Russian.
The EAPO's main aim is to facilitate intellectual property protection for inventions and industrial designs via one Eurasian application that is valid throughout all 8 Member States. As such, the Office plays an important role in streamlining the IP application process throughout Eurasia, providing a unified platform for inventors and businesses to seek protection for their ideas in multiple member states simultaneously. The EAPO system therefore simplifies procedures for patent and design protection, reduces costs, and enhances efficiency, contributing to the growth of innovation and technology within the region.
The Office has provided protection for Eurasian patents since its origin, and began to accept applications for regional industrial design protection in June 2021 following the adoption of the Protocol on the Protection of Industrial Designs to the Eurasian Patent Convention in 2019.
In order to obtain a Eurasian patent valid in all EAPO Member States, an applicant should file just one application to the EAPO which can be submitted in any language so long as it is followed by a Russian translation within a 2 month period, or within 4 months if the corresponding fee is paid. A Eurasian patent may also be obtained on the basis of a PCT application by entering the Eurasian regional phase within 31 months from the earliest priority date. Eurasian patent applications are subject to substantive examination with an applicant required to submit a request for the same within 6 months from the date of publication of the search report for conventional applications. For PCT based applications the substantive examination should be requested upon regional phase entry.
Once a Eurasian patent is granted, the patent holder is able to decide which Member States they wish for the patent to be maintained, as well as restore lapsed Eurasian patents due to unpaid maintenance fees. Applicants may also extend the term of validity of Eurasian patents in certain invention areas. During the period of time between the publication of the Eurasian patent and the payment of the first annual maintenance fee, the patent holder has the exclusive right to their invention in all Eurasian countries.
All fees in relation to Eurasian patents or industrial designs are paid to the EAPO directly, as opposed to each respective EAPO Member State individually. The filing fee for Eurasian patents may be reduced by 25% if the application contains an already produced international search report or PCT search report by another ISA, and by 40% if such reports were produced by the Rospatent.
As of 2022, the EAPO also acts as an international search authority (ISA) and an international preliminary examination authority (IPEA) in accordance with the PCT.
The EAPO has participated in multiple international collaborations, including the signing of Memorandums of Understanding (MoU's) with the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), the European Patent Office (EPO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
Moreover, the EAPO also engages in Patent Prosecution Highway programmes with several IPO's worldwide inclusive of the Japanese Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the Finnish Patent and Registration Office (PRH) and the EPO, facilitating an expedited patent processing time through the sharing of examination findings with the respective IPO's of the PPH agreements.
The EAPO's commitment to intellectual property rights underscores its significance in fostering a conducive environment for research, development, and economic growth in the region. If you would like to find out more information on how to file for IP protection in Eurasia or via the EAPO, please contact us via our social media platforms or here!
|
The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) is a regional IP office and European Union Agency founded in 1994, located and headquartered in Alicante, Spain. As such, the EUIPO facilitates the protection of European Union trademarks (EUTM), formerly a "community trade mark", as well as Registered Community Designs (RCD). An alternative name for the EUIPO is in the French language, namely “Office de l'Union européenne pour la propriété intellectuelle”.
The office was founded and operates on the basis of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark. As an international hub for intellectual property matters, the office operates in five working languages, namely English, French, German, Italian and Spanish. Applications received by the EUIPO can be processed in the twenty-three official languages of the EU.
Registered Community Designs, as well as EU trademarks registered through the EUIPO, benefit from unitary protection effect across all EU Member States. Registered trademarks and designs with the EUIPO are published and the information made publicly available in the corresponding IP registers managed by the office. The Register of European Union trademarks, for example, contains particulars of all EU trademark applications and registrations, whilst the Community Design Register contains information pertaining to registered EU designs. Both of these registers are continually updated to track any amendments to EUTM's or RCD's such as ownership information and licencing.
The EUIPO also publishes the EU Trade Marks Bulletin and Community Designs Bulletin containing said registrations, as well as other relevant information available to the public.
In addition to facilitating the registration of RCD's and EUTM's, the EUIPO also maintains the Orphan Works Database, providing access to information relating to orphan works contained in the collections of publicly accessible forms such as educational establishments and archives in Member States.
Furthermore, the office oversees the Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights, aiming to assist in the fight against counterfeiting and piracy by raising public awareness through the encouragement of best practices and cooperation. The EUIPO has overseen both Orphan Works and the Observatory of Infringements since 2012.
The EUIPO is a vital IP office for the facilitation of intellectual property throughout the European Union, with the office examining over 150,000 EUTM applications and 90,000 RCD applications every year. Moreover, the office allows for a multitude of international cooperations and initiatives spanning across the globe, aligning with the European Commission external actions policy priorities. As such, the EUIPO aims to create awareness on the benefits of IP protection and registration, encouraging innovation as a source of economic development across the EU.
Furthermore, the office supports the development of the administration of IP and enforcement services by modernizing legislation and promoting participation in international IP Treaties. Through Memoranda of Understanding (MoU), the EUIPO forges collaborations with other IP offices directly, identifying actions that can benefit the IP field in EU Member States and the IP sphere on a global level.
The EUIPO also engages in the TM5, consisting of five major IP offices for trademarks, and the ID5, comprising five major IP offices for industrial designs. These five offices include the CNIPA, EUIPO, JPO, KIPO and USPTO in close collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
The EUIPO serves as a focal point for not only the European IP sphere, but for IP protection on a multi-regional level too.
|
A Power of Attorney, often abbreviated to POA, is a legal document which provides written authorisation for another party to act on behalf of, or represent, another party in relation to certain affairs or matters. Such matters may include those of legal proceedings, corporate and commercial matters, and even personal affairs, for example, a Lasting Power Attorney (LPA).
When it comes to intellectual property rights specifically, many applicants and rights holders choose, or are obligated by the applicable national or regional IP legislation, to appoint a legal representative or agent as a third party who will act on behalf of the applicant.
Such legal representatives may include a patent attorney, for example, who would represent the IP applicant or registrant before the IPO and/or courts of the relevant country or region in regard to the assigned patent matters. A POA in this instance would serve as written authorisation for the attorney to act on behalf of the patent applicant in relation to the filing and maintenance of the applicant's patent(s).
A Power of Attorney may also be utilised in intellectual property matters in relation to the development of inventions and patents in the workplace. Instances of this nature may ensue when a company has a POA to act in relation to, or obtain, an employee's inventions that had been created and evolved during their employment.
The requirements in relation to obtaining a Power of Attorney, and for providing proof of the same for use in IP matters, vary from country to country. The law in relation to the use of a Power of Attorney in US Law, for example, states that there are multiple requirements for the obtainment and validity of a POA in the jurisdiction.
As such, in order to constitute a valid POA for a legal entity in the US, it must contain the date of POA execution, and be signed by the principal or by another adult being empowered to execute the document in the principal’s presence and under their direction. Furthermore, a POA in the US must be signed and acknowledged before a notary public or be signed by two witnesses.
In addition to domestic legislation and requirements for obtaining a POA initially, national and regional law also obligates applicants and right holders to adhere to rules before the relevant IPO's in which IP is to be filed or maintained. In some countries, for example, the representative or agent with the POA must be an attorney registered within the jurisdiction in which the IP is filed or registered, however, this obligation is not present for all states.
Further, many jurisdictions require the submission of a document confirming the signatory who has executed a Power of Attorney on behalf of the applicant in order to obtain a filing date for their IP, with some countries also mandating that the POA supplied must be an original paper copy, and be a legalised notarised version of the document in order to be valid, an obligation which is not present in every jurisdiction.
A Power of Attorney is an important and oftentimes vital aspect of the registration and maintenance of IP rights. With international legislation and requirements differing, it is important for IP applicants and right holders to pay close attention to the necessary requirements of POA execution and submission in order to successfully manage their IP portfolio.
|