Breaking: USPTO plans to cut Russia PCT authority

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Breaking: USPTO plans to cut Russia PCT authority

The USPTO HQ in Alexandria, Virginia

The USPTO has warned applicants not to select Rospatent as a PCT examining authority

The USPTO warned US applicants not to select Rospatent as a search or examining authority under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty today, March 22.

The USPTO sent out an alert stating that applicants should exercise caution before selecting Rospatent as an international searching authority or international preliminary examining authority under the PCT.

Related stories

Doing so, it said, might prevent international applications under the PCT from being successfully processed, including the transmittal of required fees through financial institutions.

A source at the USPTO said the office had issued this warning because it was working with the Department of State to terminate the agreement allowing US applicants to select Rospatent as a search or examining authority under the PCT.

As per the agreement, the termination would become effective six months after formally notifying Rospatent.

This development follows a growing trend of IP offices severing ties to Russia and Belarus in reaction to the war in Ukraine.

The EPO announced that it had suspended its co-operation with the Belarus and Russia IP offices and the EAPO on March 1. The EUIPO similarly cut ties with Rospatent and the EAPO on March 9.

In contrast, the CNIPA said on March 8 that it would extend its PPH agreement with the EAPO.

The update comes just over two weeks after the USPTO ended co-operation with officials from the Russian intellectual property office Rospatent and the EAPO on March 4, and more than a week after it ended its Global Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) agreement with Rospatent on March 11.

 

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Counsel reveal the lessons learned from a rejected amicus brief concerning Monster Energy that alleged ‘trademark bullying’
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
New guidelines from Canada's IP office will outline how specific IP owners must be when listing goods and services in applications
Panasonic aimed to coerce Xiaomi into accepting terms the court would not determine to be FRAND, according to two judges
A case heading to the England and Wales Court of Appeal raises interesting questions about the nature of the average consumer in trademark law
Barclay Damon has announced the appointment of six lawyers to its IP team, as Burns & Levinson shuts down operations
A Federal Circuit case could lead to more clarity on damages, but practitioners differ over how far constraints should go
David Hansel of Hansel Henson explains how he successfully defended two trademark cases brought by easyGroup
Andy Lee discusses how IP can encompass anything from football boots to Peppa Pig, his love for science fiction movies, and why the best lawyers are the boldest
IP and M&A partners explain how they keep tabs on referrals and why reciprocity is important for generating new business
Gift this article