8-9 April 2003

REVISION PCTMERGER CH I &

CH I,DELETION DEMAND,Not yet!

Important gain experience from recently made

amendments in the PCT Regulations;

- introduction W O in CH I for instance

- await development SPLT;

- await implementation PLT

8-9 April 2003

REASONSThe treaty should be

amended only concerning what is really necessary, if anything

because:

- unrealistic that all PCT member States could agree to the same amendments to take place at the same time

consequences:

- big problems for users and authorities

8-9 April 2003

REVISION PCT REGULATIONS

Simplifications for the users, third parties, offices:

Good!

Recently made revisions:

Good!

Implementation of electronic filing/processing of international applications:

Good!

8-9 April 2003

QUALITY CONTROL

Revision of PCT International Search- and Preliminary Examination Guidelines:

Good!

Basic requirement concerning quality:

comes from the customerThe customer demands:

legal certainty:-top quality state of the art search,-predictable decisions on patentability

Not possible to employ external monitoring of quality!Quality of service:

established at the moment of serviceQuality assurance:competence at the source of service

8-9 April 2003

World reference in patent examination:

EPO!

Therefore:

High quality in the PCT Procedure:high measure of harmonisation with EPO

Harmonisation should be considered in topics such as:-search tools-search methods-search practice-guidelines-examiner competence-quality assurance

Harmonisation should be based on:mutual confidence:commonly agreed standards applied, not on institutionalised reports from external accountants

8-9 April 2003

COORDINATED SEARCHES

Not in favour!

Will increase the workload in the big offices

8-9 April 2003

CONTRACTING-OUT SEARCHES

For the time being:

not a question on the Swedish table