EPO: Detailed EPO statistics released

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

EPO: Detailed EPO statistics released

As reported in a recent article, the EPO has seen performance gains in 2015, with the number of grants having increased by some 6% compared to the previous year. A closer look at the official EPO statistics of 2015 reveals more details.

As in previous years, filing activity was particularly strong in the fields of computer technology and digital communication, electrical machinery and medical technology.

Applicants active in non-chemical fields dominate the top 10 lists of patentees. The list is headed by Bosch, followed by Ericsson, Siemens, Samsung, LG, General Electric, Philips, BASF, Huawei and Panasonic.

Some 47% of the 160,000 applications received originated from EPO contracting states, with the USA coming in second at 27%, and Japan third at 13%. China and South Korea account for 4% each. The number of applications from China has shown a remarkable growth rate of 12.6% compared to 2014.

The number of inter partes oppositions decided increased by 17.6% to 3,713. In 31% of the decisions in opposition, the patent was maintained as granted. The percentage of patents revoked in opposition was also 31%. In the remaining 38% of the cases, the patent was maintained in amended form. The proportion of patents opposed was 4.4%.

The performance of the Boards of Appeal shows a steady state as regards the number of technical appeal cases decided. Some 2,387 technical appeals were received, of which 1,523 were opposition appeals and the remaining 864 were examination appeals.

The EPO's throughput time of oppositions and appeals remains a concern to many, and improvements would presumably be welcomed by most opponents and their patent attorneys.

frederiksen.jpg

Jakob Pade Frederiksen


Inspicos P/SKogle Allé 2DK-2970 HoersholmCopenhagen, DenmarkTel: +45 7070 2422Fax: +45 7070 2423info@inspicos.comwww.inspicos.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
The court ruled against the owner of the ‘Umbro’ mark, despite noting that post-sale confusion can be a legitimate ground for infringement
Shem Otanga discusses the importance of curiosity and passion, and why he would have loved to have been a professional recording artist
Practitioners say the Bombay High Court shouldn’t have refused well-known trademark recognition for TikTok simply because the app is banned in India
In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
Gift this article