By Donald Zuhn --
In a joint press release issued on Monday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and European Patent Office announced that the two offices would be working together to develop a joint patent classification system. One of the goals of the joint effort will be to align the EPO classification and U.S. classification systems with the International Patent Classification (IPC) system, which is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). However, the USPTO and EPO noted that the jointly developed system will be more detailed than the IPC system in order to improve patent searching. The joint classification system is expected to help the USPTO and EPO eliminate unnecessary duplication of work, thereby promoting more efficient examination and enhancing examination quality.
Regarding the joint effort, USPTO Director David Kappos and EPO President Benoît Battistelli stated that the USPTO and EPO had agreed "to work toward the formation of a partnership to explore the development of a joint classification system based on the European Classification system (ECLA) that will incorporate the best classification practices of the two offices," noting that the new system would be aligned with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) classification standards and the International Patent Classification (IPC) structure. The joint release called the effort "a milestone achievement" for the Five IP Offices (IP5) -- consisting of the EPO, USPTO, Japan Patent Office (JPO), Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China (SIPO) -- which would bring the IP5 closer to a Common Hybrid Classification, one of the IP5's ten Foundation Projects.
This new joint patent classification system should, indeed, be a significant step forward for patent law, on a global scale. Unless one is a staunch IP opponent, it's hard to argue with a system that promises better patents, faster -- and that's what this joint effort has the potential to achieve.
http://www.industryweek.com/articles/patent_enforcement_21538.aspx?SectionID=2
Posted by: patent litigation | November 01, 2010 at 11:06 PM