Laos: Accelerating patent application prosecution

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Laos: Accelerating patent application prosecution

While an amended version of the Lao Law on Intellectual Property took effect in June 2018, patent applicants can still be frustrated by the lengthy application pendency in the Lao Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) of the Ministry of Science and Technology. There are, however, several ways to accelerate Lao patent prosecution.

Laos participates in the ASEAN Patent Examination Cooperation (ASPEC) which allows applicants for patent protection in other ASEAN patent offices to save cost and time when seeking Lao patent protection. There are nine participating ASEAN IP offices (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam) and ASPEC enables Lao DIP to utilise the search and examination results from any of these IP offices as a reference in the Lao patent prosecution when that IP office has found at least one claim novel and inventive. In this manner, the applicant benefits from expedited prosecution from the time of filing the ASPEC request until grant.

In order to qualify for ASPEC, a patent application filed at the Lao DIP must be a corresponding patent application to one that is filed and examined in another ASEAN patent office. Patent applications are corresponding applications if they are linked by a Paris Convention priority claim (from one to the other or from both to another patent application) or are both national phase entry applications from the same Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) application.

In 2016, a second means of accelerating Lao patent prosecution was launched with the Japan Patent Office (JPO). A framework was established by agreement between the Lao Ministry of Science and Technology and the JPO. Under the agreement, when patent applications have been examined and granted at the JPO, patent rights may also be granted to corresponding applications which have been filed in Laos without conducting substantial examinations. Therefore, applicants of Lao patent applications who own patents granted by the JPO can request accelerated decisions on eligibility for grant of the Lao patent applications with the DIP at any time after grant of the Japanese patent.

The requirements are that the designated patent application filed with the DIP must share the same earliest priority date and, like ASPEC, be linked by Paris Convention or PCT priority. In addition, since the designated patent application filed with the DIP requesting validation in Laos must already be a valid patent in Japan, the Lao pending claims must be the same as the claims granted by the JPO.

Providing a further means for accelerating patent grant in Laos, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) earlier this year also announced that, under a memorandum of understanding signed in 2018 to further the IP cooperation between China and Laos under the Belt and Road Initiative and China-ASEAN IP cooperation, patent applicants who own valid Chinese patents may also request accelerated eligibility for grant decisions on Lao patent applications.

Thus, Lao patent prosecution can be accelerated in several ways to reduce filing to grant pendency in Laos using Japanese or Chinese patents or ASEAN patent applications.

collopy-dan.jpg

Daniel Collopy


more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
Gift this article