APO and DPMA agree on Patent Prosecution Highway pilot programme

After Merpel's news relating to "unrest" at the EPO yesterday (see here), some much less controversial, indeed happy patent news.
Happy patent-loving kittens
The German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA) and Austrian Patent Office (APO) have agreed on a Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) pilot programme, the DPMA proudly reports on its website: from 1 June 2014 onwards this Austrian-German PPH pilot programme will allow patent applicants to request accelerated examination of their applications.  The PPH pilot programme has an initial term of two years with the option of renewal.

The DPMA’s press release states:
"As immediate neighbours, Germany and Austria not only have close political relations based on trust but also flourishing economic ties: Germany is Austria's most important economic partner. Many German companies have branches and production sites in Austria," says President Rudloff-Schäffer. "The agreement signed today, which will enable patent applicants to have their applications examined faster by Germany's and Austria's patent offices from 1 June 2014 on, will further promote the economy and innovation in Europe."

More information about the PPH pilot programme should shortly be available via this link (in English).
APO and DPMA agree on Patent Prosecution Highway pilot programme APO and DPMA agree on Patent Prosecution Highway pilot programme Reviewed by Birgit Clark on Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. I'm interested to learn whether anyone, in the entire history of PPH agreements, has ever actually used one?

    If so, are there any statistics on their use?


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.