DOCSLIB.ORG

Transcript of the Special 301 Public Hearing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transcript of the Special 301 Public Hearing 1 OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE + + + + + 2019 SPECIAL 301 PUBLIC HEARING + + + + + WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 27, 2019 + + + + + The Hearing was convened in Conference Rooms I and II of the USTR Annex Building, 1724 F Street, NW, Washington, D.C. at 10:00 a.m., Daniel Lee, Chair, presiding. COMMITTEE MEMBERS DANIEL LEE, Chair EMILY BLEIMUND, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services SUNG CHANG, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative WON CHANG, U.S. Department of the Treasury KARIN FERRITER, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office BRAD GREENBERG, U.S. Copyright Office DAVID HENRY, U.S. Department of State OMAR KARAWA, U.S. Department of Agriculture MATTHEW LAMBERTI, U.S. Department of Justice STEVAN MITCHELL, U.S. Department of Commerce MAUREEN M. PETTIS, U.S. Department of Labor RACHEL SALZMAN, U.S. Department of Commerce ANNE SNYDER, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 2 GOVERNMENT WITNESSES ALEJANDRO BILBAO LA VIEJA, Embassy of Bolivia REZA PAHLEVI CHAIRUL, Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia ALEJANDRA GASTELU-SOTOMAYOR, Ministry of International Trade and Integration, Government of Bolivia IVO KONSTANTINOV, Embassy of the Republic of Bulgaria BOKYUN NAM, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Government of the Republic of Korea SCARLEY MARINA VALERIANO BARROSO, National Service for Intellectual Property, Government of Bolivia VALERII ZHALDAK, Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, Government of Ukraine NON-GOVERNMENT WITNESSES JAIME CASTANEDA, Consortium for Common Food Names (CCFN) GUAN JIAN, China Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC) TAN JIAN, China Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC) MARIANA JORGE, MFJ International, LLC PAUL KILMER, Trademark Working Group MARK LAUROESCH, Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) JAMES LOVE, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) PETER MAYBARDUK, Public Citizen CHRISTINA MITROPOULOS, American Apparel and Footwear Association (AAFA) CHRIS MOORE, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) ROGER MURRY, Alliance for Fair Trade with India (AFTI) RYAN ONG, National Association of Manufacturers JUSTIN PINE, Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 3 MATT PRIEST, Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America (FDRA) KEVIN ROSENBAUM, International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) BRIAN SCARPELLI, ACT/The App Association NON-GOVERNMENT WITNESSES (cont'd) MATTHEW SCHRUERS, Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) DAYAAR SINGLA, NALSAR Litigation Project (NLP) ELLEN SZYMANSKI, U.S. Chamber of Commerce JOSEPH WHITLOCK, BSA, The Software Alliance Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 4 CONTENTS Opening Remarks. 6 Government of Bolivia. .13 Government of Bulgaria . .20 Government of Indonesia. .30 Government of Korea. .39 Government of Ukraine. .46 ACT/The App Association. .55 Alliance of Fair Trade with India (AFTI) . .65 American Apparel and Footwear Association (AAFA) . .75 Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO). .86 BSA/The Software Alliance. .97 China Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC). 108 Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) . 115 Consortium for Common Food Names (CCFN). 125 Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America (FDRA) . 136 Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO). 148 International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). 157 Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 5 CONTENTS Knowledge Ecology International (KEI). 167 MFJ International, LLC . 178 National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). 187 NALSAR Litigation Project (NLP). 199 Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) . 209 Public Citizen . 219 Trademark Working Group. 232 U.S. Chamber of Commerce . 242 U.S.-India Strategic Partnership Forum . 251 Closing Remarks - Office of the United States Trade Representative. 260 Adjourn. 261 Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 6 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 10:04 a.m. 3 CHAIR LEE: Good morning folks. Well, 4 we're going to get started. I know some people 5 are still filing in from security. 6 But, good morning. My name is Daniel 7 Lee, and I am the Acting Assistant U.S. Trade 8 Representative for Innovation and Intellectual 9 Property. 10 I would like to welcome everyone to 11 the public hearing for the annual Special 301 12 Review. The Special 301 Review is a statutorily 13 mandated exercise we undertake every year to 14 develop an overall strategy to ensure adequate 15 and effective intellectual property rights 16 protection and equitable market access in foreign 17 countries for United States persons that rely on 18 protection of intellectual property right such as 19 copyright and related rights, trademarks, 20 patents, and trade secrets. 21 Ensuring that U.S. owners of 22 intellectual property or IP have a full and fair Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 7 1 opportunity to use and profit from their IP is 2 one of the top trade priorities outlined in the 3 President's annual Trade Policy Agenda. 4 This is the 31st annual Special 301 5 Review, and the 10th public hearing that USTR has 6 hosted in connection with the Review. 7 I would like to note for the record 8 that today is Wednesday, February 27th, 2019. 9 And that this hearing is taking place at the 10 Office of the U.S. Trade Representative or USTR. 11 We will make a transcript of today's 12 hearing available to the public on USTR's 13 website. Today's hearing is scheduled to go 14 until approximately 3:30. 15 And we will break for one hour between 16 12:20 and 1:20. I would like to ask for 17 everyone's cooperation with keeping the hearing 18 on track. 19 At this point I would like to ask 20 colleagues on the hearing panel, all of whom 21 represent U.S. government agencies that serve on 22 the Special 301 Subcommittee to introduce Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 8 1 themselves. Maybe we can start at the end. 2 MR. KARAWA: Good morning. My name is 3 Omar Karawa from the Department of Agriculture. 4 Thank you. 5 MS. BLEIMUND: Good morning. Emily 6 Bleimund, Department of Health and Human 7 Services. 8 MS. PETTIS: Good morning, Maureen 9 Pettis, Department of Labor. 10 MR. LAMBERTI: Good morning everyone. 11 My name is Matt Lamberti. I'm with the U.S. 12 Department of Justice. 13 MR. CHANG: Good morning. My name is 14 Sung Chang. I am with the Office of the U.S. 15 Trade Representative. 16 MR. MITCHELL: I'm Stevan Mitchell 17 with the International Trade Administration, 18 Department of Commerce. 19 MR. HENRY: I'm David Henry with the 20 Department of State. 21 MR. CHANG: I'm Won Chang, Department 22 of Treasury. Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 9 1 MR. GREENBERG: Brad Greenberg, U.S. 2 Copyright Office. 3 MS. FERRITER: Good morning, Karin 4 Ferriter, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. 5 CHAIR LEE: Thank you. The Special 6 301 Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff 7 Committee is comprised of the agencies you've 8 just heard from, and chaired by USTR. It 9 conducts the annual Special 301 Review each year. 10 The Review is driven by stakeholder 11 contributions and by contributions of Washington- 12 based agencies and our embassy-based personnel 13 around the world. The Subcommittee is currently 14 in the information gathering phase. 15 On behalf of the agencies here, we 16 thank you for the views, insights, opinions, and 17 factual information that you will share with us 18 today. 19 The schedule of today's hearing is 20 comprised of interested parties from foreign 21 government officials, private sector interest, 22 and civil society, who responded to USTR's notice Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 10 1 in the Federal Register, published on December 2 28th, and voluntarily requested the opportunity 3 to appear at this public hearing. 4 As a reminder, the purpose of today's 5 hearing is to provide the Special 301 6 Subcommittee with additional information that we 7 can use in deliberations that will lead to the 8 publication of the 2019 Special 301 Report to 9 Congress on or about April 26, 2019. 10 This year we have received public 11 filings that address over 75 countries and many 12 country-specific IP protection and enforcement 13 issues that may negatively affect our bilateral 14 trading relationships. 15 Those filings are available to the 16 public at www.regulations.gov. The Docket Number 17 is USTR-2018-0037. 18 The Special 301 Report is the result 19 of a Congressionally-mandated annual review of 20 the state of intellectual property rights, 21 protection, enforcement in trading partners 22 around the world, which the United States -- or Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 11 1 which the Office of the United States Trade 2 Representative conducts pursuant to Section 182 3 of the Trade Act of 1974 as amended by the 4 Omnibus Trade and Competitive Act of 1988, and 5 the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. 6 The provisions of Section 182 are 7 commonly referred to as the Special 301 8 Provisions of the Trade Act. Hence, the Special 9 301 Report. 10 Specifically, Section 182 of the Trade 11 Act requires that the United States Trade 12 Representative identify countries that deny 13 adequate and effective protection of intellectual 14 property rights, or that deny fair and equitable 15 market access to U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I-Link for Access Code on the AIA/14
    i-link for Access Code on the AIA/14 Q1. What is an Access Code? A1. Data that used together with the application number and filing date to uniquely identify a patent application that is registered into the WIPO DAS (World Intellectual Property Organization Digital Access Service). As of March 18, 2013, all WIPO DAS participating offices require that the access code be provided in order to retrieve the priority document. Q2. When is an Access Code required? A2. When the following conditions are met: (1) The foreign priority application is filed in a foreign intellectual property office that is a participating WIPO DAS depositing office; (2) Appropriate steps have been taken by the applicant to make the priority application available to the Office via the WIPO DAS; and, (3) The applicant wishes the Office to attempt electronic retrieval of the priority application. Q3. What format should be used on the Application Data Sheet (ADS) Foreign Priority Information section? A3. The application number and access code format are determined by the DAS participating office. Sample application number formats can be found on the USPTO Website at https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ADSSampleFormat.pdf Q4. Will the Office notify the applicant when an Access Code is required, but not furnished? A4. When an applicant claims priority to a foreign application filed in a WIPO DAS depositing office and fails to provide the required access code, the U.S. application filing receipt will include an indication “No Access Code Provided” adjacent to the foreign application number. Q5. Will the Office notify the applicant that retrieval of the priority document will be attempted? A5.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Patent Law and Novartis AG V. Union of India
    TRIALS AND TRIPS-ULATIONS: INDIAN PATENT LAW AND No VAR TIS A G v. UNION OF INDIA By Linda L Lee I. INTRODUCTION When pharmaceutical company Novartis challenged the rejection of its patent application for the leukemia drug Gleevec in Novartis A G v. Union of India,' it became the first major legal challenge to India's newly amended patent law. In 2005, India purportedly made the final changes required to bring its intellectual property laws in compliance with the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the World Trade Organization's (WTO) minimum standards for intellectual property protection, 2 but its patent law is still fraught with a number of controver- sial provisions. The ability of pharmaceutical companies such as Novartis to secure patent protection in India not only is important in creating incen- tives for pharmaceutical research, but also greatly affects the Indian ge- neric drug industry, and therefore the price of medicine available to pa- tients. India is the world's second most populous country3 and the second- fastest growing major economy,4 but has 70% of its population living on less than $2 per day,5 making Novartis A G of paramount importance. © 2008 Linda L. Lee. 1. Novartis AG v. Union of India, (2007) 4 MADRAS L.J. 1153, available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/456550/High-Court-order-Novartis-Union-of-India. 2. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, Le- gal Instruments-Results of the Uruguay Round, 33 I.L.M.
    [Show full text]
  • India: Effects of Tariffs and Nontariff Measures on U.S. Agricultural Exports
    United States International Trade Commission India: Effects of Tariffs and Nontariff Measures on U.S. Agricultural Exports Investigation No. 332-504 USITC Publication 4107 November 2009 U.S. International Trade Commission COMMISSIONERS Shara L. Aranoff, Chairman Daniel R. Pearson, Vice Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun Charlotte R. Lane Irving A. Williamson Dean A. Pinkert Robert A. Rogowsky Director of Operations Karen Laney-Cummings Director, Office of Industries Address all communications to Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 www.usitc.gov India: Effects of Tariffs and Nontariff Measures on U.S. Agricultural Exports Investigation No. 332-504 Publication 4107 November 2009 This report was prepared principally by the Office of Industries Project Leader George S. Serletis [email protected] Deputy Project Leader Brian Allen [email protected] Laura Bloodgood, Joanna Bonarriva, John Fry, John Giamalva, Katherine Linton, Brendan Lynch, and Marin Weaver Primary Reviewers Alexander Hammer and Deborah McNay Office of Economics Michael Ferrantino, Jesse Mora, Jose Signoret, and Marinos Tsigas Administrative Support Phyllis Boone, Monica Reed, and Wanda Tolson Under the direction of Jonathan R. Coleman, Chief Agriculture and Fisheries Division Abstract This report describes and analyzes policies and other factors that affect U.S. agricultural exports to India. The findings suggest that India’s high agricultural tariffs are a significant impediment to U.S. agricultural exports and that certain Indian nontariff measures (NTMs), including sanitary and phyosanitary measures, substantially limit or effectively prohibit certain U.S. agricultural products. Agriculture is vital to India’s economy, accounting for a substantial share of employment (60 percent) and GDP (17 percent).
    [Show full text]
  • Post-2005 TRIPS Scenario in Patent Protection in the Pharmaceutical Sector
    Post-2005 TRIPS scenario in patent protection in the pharmaceutical sector: The case of the generic pharmaceutical industry in India BISWAJIT DHAR Professor and Head Centre for WTO Studies Indian Institute for Foreign Trade India And K.M. GOPAKUMAR Centre for Trade and Development India November, 2006 Post-2005 TRIPS scenario in patent protection in the pharmaceutical sector: The case of the generic pharmaceutical industry in India Biswajit DHAR International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) International Environnement House 2 7 Chemin de Balexert, 1219 Geneva, Switzerland Tel: +41 22 917 8492 Fax: +41 22 917 8093 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.ictsd.org United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Palais de Nations 8 – 14 avenue de la Paix, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland Tel : +41 22 907 1234 Fax : +41 22 9070043 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.unctad.org International Development Research Centre (IDRC) 250 Albert Street Ottawa, ON, Canada K1P 6M1 Phone: (+1-613) 236-6163 Fax: (+1-613) 238-7230 e-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.idrc.ca Programme Team (ICTSD): David Vivas-Eugui, Pedro Roffe, Gina Vea, Preeti Ramdasi Project Team (UNCTAD): James Zhan, Kiyoshi Adachi and Christoph Spennemann Programme Team (IDRC): Randy Spence, Stephen McGurk, Jaqueline Loh Acknowledgment: Funding for the UNCTAD/ICTSD Project on Intellectual Property Rights and Sustainable Development has been generously provided by DFID, IDRC, SIDA and the Rockefeller Foundation. The broad aim of this Programme is to improve the understanding of intellectual property rights related issues among developing countries and to assist them in building their capacity for ongoing as well as future negotiations on intellectual property rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group
    Annex 1 E PCT/WG/11/27 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: JANUARY 11, 2019 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Working Group Eleventh Session Geneva, June 18 to 22, 2018 REPORT adopted by the Working Group 1. The Patent Cooperation Treaty Working Group held its eleventh session in Geneva from June 18 to 22, 2018. 2. The following members of the Working Group were represented at the session: (i) the following Member States of the International Patent Cooperation Union (PCT Union): Algeria, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe (69); and (ii) the following intergovernmental organizations: the European Patent Office (EPO), the Nordic Patent Institute (NPI), and the Visegrad Patent Institute (VPI) (3). 3. The following Member States of the International Union for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Union) participated in the session as an observer: Mauritius, Yemen (2). 4. The following intergovernmental organizations were represented by observers: African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), African Union (AU), Eurasian Patent Organization (EAPO), European Union (EU), Patent Office of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC Patent Office), South Centre (7).
    [Show full text]
  • Preparation for Accelerated Examination of Patent Application in India It Takes on Average 7 Years from Application to Registrat
    Column No.19 Preparation for Accelerated Examination of Patent Application in India 【2013/6/19】 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Preparation for Accelerated Examination of Patent Application in India Hiroyuki Hashimoto, Patent Attorney, Deputy Director, Miyoshi & Miyoshi Osamu Kubori, Foreign Services Division Chief, Miyoshi & Miyoshi Vinit Bapat, Indian Patent Attorney, Managing Director, Sangam IP Recently, for Japanese enterprises, India is positioned as not only a production base aimed at the Indian domestic market but also as an exporting base for Africa and the Middle East, taking advantage of its geographical location. Also, law offices dealing with intellectual properties in India are taking advantage of the country's geographical strengths to not merely provide services relating to intellectual property protection within India. In addition, they have positively built up a network including neighboring countries, and are seeking retention of overseas customers. In light of these circumstances alone, the significance of India is great as a base for IP strategy from South East Asia to the west, and many Japanese enterprises focus attention on the importance of obtaining intellectual property rights, such as patents, in India. However, under current circumstances, from initial application to the start of an examination takes a long time in India so applicants face a problem in trying to accelerate important applications. Therefore, we propose measures that can contribute to accelerated examination of patent applications in India. It takes on average 7 years from application to registration in India, which has no accelerated examination system India has four Patent Offices (Calcutta, Mumbai, Delhi, and Chennai) and enables overseas residents to file a patent application with any of the Patent Offices by selecting a local agent (patent attorney).
    [Show full text]
  • Patent Agent Examination Guidebook
    IIPTA Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark Patent Agent Examination Guidebook Patent Agent Examination Preparation Guidebook Compiled by: Indian Institute Of Patent and Trademark Disclaimer: IIPTA and Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark are brands of Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark Education and Research Private Limited, a privately held company. IIPTA is not affiliated to Indian government and Indian patent and trademark office. Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark 1 Contents What is Patent Agent Exam? ........................................................................................ 3 17 most asked questions about Patent Agent Examination ...................................... 4 10 myths about Patent Agent Examination............................................................... 12 Top 8 questions about what is the salary of the Registered Patent Agent in India 18 Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark 2 What is Patent Agent Exam? Patent Agent Exam is conducted by Government of India. After qualifying the examination, professionals can start practicing as patent agents and help corporates and individuals filing patents. Indian Institute of Patent and Trademark 3 17 most asked questions about Patent Agent Examination Question 1: What is the eligibility criterion for appearing in Patent Agent Exam conducted by Indian Patent Office – Age, Qualification, and Citizenship etc.? Eligibility criteria to appear in the Indian Patent Agent Exam are simple and as follows: Minimum 21 years Indian Nationality Minimum one science based graduation [degree in science, engineering or technology from any university established under law in India or possesses such other equivalent qualifications as the Central Government may specify in this behalf – BSc, MSc, B. Pharma, M. Pharma, BE, ME, B.Tech, M.Tech, PhD, MBBS etc (this is just a small list of degrees qualifying for Indian Patent Agent Exam and may not be complete.
    [Show full text]
  • Phrma SPECIAL 301 SUBMISSION 2008 OVERVIEW
    PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PhRMA) SPECIAL 301 SUBMISSION 2008 PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PhRMA) SPECIAL 301 SUBMISSION 2008 1 PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PhRMA) SPECIAL 301 SUBMISSION 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS PhRMA SPECIAL 301 SUBMISSION 2008 OVERVIEW.....................................4 PRIORITY FOREIGN COUNTRIES ...................................................................26 Philippines .........................................................................................................28 Thailand .............................................................................................................32 SECTION 306 MONITORING ............................................................................42 Paraguay ...........................................................................................................44 The People’s Republic of China .........................................................................48 PRIORITY WATCH LIST COUNTRIES .............................................................56 ASIA-PACIFIC....................................................................................................58 Australia .............................................................................................................60 India (with OCR) ................................................................................................64 Indonesia ...........................................................................................................72
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions
    1/8 FAQs Doing Business in India IPR (Patents) 1. How can one find out that an invention is already patented? (Under The Patents Act 1970) The person concerned can perform a preliminary search on Patent Office website in the Indian Patent database of granted patent or Patent Office journal published every week. The public can conduct search free of charge on the website of Patent Office. The person concerned can also make a request for such information under section 153 of the Act. For further details please access following link. 2. Where could one find a copy of the Patent Office Journal without purchasing the publication? The Patent Office e-journal is freely available on patent office site: www.ipindia.nic.in For more information, click here. 3. What are the contents of the Patent Office Journal? The Patent office Journal contains information relating to patent applications which are published u/s 11A, post grant publication, restoration of patent, notifications, list of nonworking patents and public notices issued by the Patent Office. For more information, click here. 4. Where can one find the information relating to published/ granted patent application? The information relating to the patent application is published in the Patent Office Journal issued on every Friday. This is also available in electronic form on the website of the Patent Office, www.ipindia.nic.in For more information, click here. Copyright © 2021 Invest India. All Rights Reserved. 1/8 2/8 5. What happens to a patent application once it is examined? After examination, the Patent Office issues an examination report to the applicant, which is generally known as First Examination Report (FER).
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Patent Law and TRIPS: Redrawing the Flexibility Framework in the Context of Public Policy and Health V
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Scholarly Commons Global Business & Development Law Journal Volume 25 Issue 1 Symposium: The Global Impact and Article 12 Implemenation of Human Rights Norms 1-1-2012 Indian Patent Law and TRIPS: Redrawing the Flexibility Framework in the Context of Public Policy and Health V. K. Unni Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/globe Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation V. K. Unni, Indian Patent Law and TRIPS: Redrawing the Flexibility Framework in the Context of Public Policy and Health, 25 Pac. McGeorge Global Bus. & Dev. L.J. 323 (2012). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/globe/vol25/iss1/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals and Law Reviews at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Global Business & Development Law Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Indian Patent Law and TRIPS: Redrawing the Flexibility Framework in the Context of Public Policy and Health V.K. Unni* Presented in March 2011 at the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law Symposium on The Global Impact and Implementation of Human Rights Norms. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................. ...... 323 II. PATENT AMENDMENTS POST 1995 ................................... 330 III. PATENTS AMENDMENT ACT 1999 ............................. ...... 331 IV. THE PATENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2002................. ...... 333 V. THE PATENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005 ..............................335 VI. FLEXIBILITIES BUILT INTO THE INDIAN PATENT LAW .................
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of TRIPS in India
    Impact of TRIPS in India Impact of TRIPS in India An Access to Medicines Perspective Prabodh Malhotra © Prabodh Malhotra 2010 Foreword © Shovan Ray 2010 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2010 978-0-230-27278-1 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6-10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The author has asserted his right to be identified as the author of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2010 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries. ISBN 978-1-349-32348-7 ISBN 978-0-230-29074-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/9780230290747 This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully managed and sustained forest sources.
    [Show full text]
  • PCT Newsletter 05/2021 (May 2021)
    www.wipo.int/pct/en May 2021 | No. 05/2021 Companies and Intellectual Property Office (Dominica) Delegates Receiving Office Functions to the International Bureau The Intellectual Property Office (Dominica) has notified the International Bureau (IB) that, with effect from 15 April 2021, it has ceased acting as a receiving Office and has delegated its receiving Office functions to the IB. Furthermore, the Office has specified the Canadian Intellectual Property Office and the European Patent Office (EPO) as competent International Searching Authorities (ISAs) and International Preliminary Examining Authorities (IPEAs) for international applications filed by nationals and residents of Dominica with the IB as receiving Office. (Note that the Canadian Intellectual Property Office is a competent IPEA only if the international search is being or was carried out by the same Office, and the EPO is a competent IPEA only if the international search is being or was carried out by the EPO or another ISA located in and operating for any State party to the European Patent Convention.) (Updating of PCT Applicant’s Guide, Annex C (IB)) Electronic Filing and Processing of International Applications Offices that will stop accepting international applications filed using PCT-SAFE Canadian Intellectual Property Office The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (which already accepts international applications filed using ePCT) has notified the International Bureau (IB) that, with effect from 1 July 2021, it will no longer accept international applications filed in electronic form using the PCT-SAFE software. Any PCT-SAFE users who file with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office as receiving Office are advised to start using ePCT-Filing as soon as possible.
    [Show full text]