Medical patent prior examination fast tracking – new resolution from the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office
by Moeller IP Brazil
On May 8, 2018, the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (INPI) published Resolution No. 218, which amends Resolution number 80 of March 19, 2013. This regulation prioritizes the technical examination of patent applications for pharmaceutical products and processes, as well as equipment related to public health.
Through this resolution, patent applications referring to the diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS), Cancer, Rare Diseases or Neglected Diseases will be prioritized.
Priority will also be given to patent applications related to products, processes and equipment and / or materials used in health treatment related to the assistance policies of the Ministry of Health and considered strategic within the scope of the Unified Health System (SUS).
In order for a priority patent to be granted, it must be published, and the request for the priority technical examination.
In order for the priority examination to be carried out, it is necessary that the patent:
- does not refer to the patent whose examination is suspended for compliance with a formal requirement previously formulated;
- does not refer to the patent which has already been granted priority examination;
- refers to the patent with the payment of your annuities up to date. This resolution also admits the request for priority examination for patents that have already begun their technical examination.
The materials available at this blog are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney or Moeller IP directly to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this blog or any of the links contained within the blog do not create an attorney-client relationship between Moeller IP and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.