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

External investor-controlled IP firms have both downsides and upsides, so they don’t deserve all the flak they get
Andrew Blattman, CEO of IPH, tells Managing IP what’s next for the group in Canada and how it navigates issues such as conflicts and cost efficiency
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
In-house counsel explain how they develop or maintain 'IP-aware' cultures at their companies and how private practice lawyers can help
Josh Budwin, principal at the firm, said the case was one of the most complex technology disputes he's ever worked on
For the latest article in our regular series covering UPC developments, we summarise five rulings and highlight what’s expected later this month
John Keville, partner at Sheppard Mullin, explains how he secured a patent subject matter eligibility victory for his client against GoPro
An IP partner at Womble Bond Dickinson explains how its combination with Lewis Roca will create a fully-rounded litigation and prosecution service
Ronen Speyer of Evalueserve explains why in a competitive business landscape, IP has become a key driver in gaining a competitive advantage
Michael Sharp, who moved to Canadian firm Field Law from Aurora Cannabis in June, said he is enjoying cross-practice collaboration at his new firm
Gift this article