Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 FEBRUARY 2021

CIPO And EPO Make PPH Program Permanent

Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Explore more from Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (the "CIPO") and the European Patent Office (the "EPO") have announced that their pilot Patent Prosecution Highway...

CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Author LinkedIn connections

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (the "CIPO") and the European Patent Office (the "EPO") have announced that their pilot Patent Prosecution Highway (the "PPH") program has become permanent effective 6 January 2021. The PPH program allows applicants prosecuting a patent application at the EPO or the CIPO to have their application processed faster at the other office if certain requirements are met.

To read the CIPO's announcement click here. To read the EPO's announcement click here.

Originally Published by Oyen Wiggs, February 2021

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

A KTEP Ahead: Canada's New Mechanism For Advanced Examination Of Patent Applications

For a Canadian patent application to be examined, an applicant must file a request for examination with the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO). In most cases, the order in which applications are examined is based on the order that the requests for examination are received. An applicant may be able to accelerate examination of their patent application through several existing mechanisms, including advancing examination via special order, accelerating examination of applications related to green technology, and the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH).
CanadaIntellectual Property
Smart & Biggar
Smart & Biggar
Article

Patenting Innovation In Data Centres: Protecting Configurations, Cooling Technologies, And The Green Advantage

The rapid expansion of data centre infrastructure has made these facilities a focal point for technological innovation and intellectual property investment. From server configurations to advanced cooling systems, the technologies deployed inside data centres represent significant R&D expenditure and competitive advantages. Patent protection offers operators and developers opportunities to safeguard innovations...
WorldwideIntellectual Property
Gowling WLG
Gowling WLG
Article

Recent TMOB Decision Shows That Sometimes, Establishing Use In A Section 45 Proceeding Is Straightforward

The Trademarks Opposition Board recently upheld a registration for the FRÜH & DESIGN trademark covering top fermented beers, demonstrating that clear evidence of use can successfully defend against section 45 proceedings. This decision illustrates how straightforward documentation of sales, distribution networks, and delivery records proved sufficient to maintain trademark protection in Canada.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

Understanding The Canadian Intellectual Property Office's Patent TermAdjustment (PTA) System

Canada's new Patent Term Adjustment system offers compensation for delays in patent issuance, but qualifying depends on meeting specific eligibility requirements and strategic prosecution decisions. Understanding how the CIPO's "chess clock" philosophy works and implementing key strategies like deferred examination and timely maintenance fee payments can significantly impact whether meaningful term adjustments are granted.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP
Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP
Article

What Evidence Of Use Is Required In A Section 45 Proceeding?

The Trademarks Opposition Board's recent ruling in Therrien Couture Joli-coeur v Oldcastle Building Products clarifies the evidentiary standards trademark owners must meet when responding to section 45 notices under Canada's Trademarks Act. This decision highlights critical distinctions between evidence of actual transfers versus mere advertising, and underscores the necessity of providing specific proof for each registered good to avoid expungement.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

Restoring Patent Priority In Canada

Canadian patent law provides mechanisms for restoring priority claims when applications are filed after the standard 12-month priority period expires. Understanding the specific requirements, timelines, and criteria for restoration across regular Canadian applications, PCT national phase entries, and international stage PCT applications can help applicants preserve earlier filing dates and avoid self-anticipation issues.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Gowling WLG
Gowling WLG
Article

Trademarks For Businesses - Part 3: Applying To Register A Trademark

Obtaining a trademark registration provides several benefits for businesses. Trademark registrations can help protect your rights and serve as assets that may be leveraged through licensing or used as collateral. However, obtaining a trademark registration in multiple jurisdictions can be a costly endeavour, and it can be difficult to prioritize where and when to seek registration to maximize protection.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Smart & Biggar
Smart & Biggar
Article

Recent TMOB Decision Shows That Sometimes, Establishing Use In A Section 45 Proceeding Is Straightforward

The Trademarks Opposition Board recently upheld a registration for the FRÜH & DESIGN trademark covering top fermented beers, demonstrating that clear evidence of use can successfully defend against section 45 proceedings. This decision illustrates how straightforward documentation of sales, distribution networks, and delivery records proved sufficient to maintain trademark protection in Canada.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

What Evidence Of Use Is Required In A Section 45 Proceeding?

The Trademarks Opposition Board's recent ruling in Therrien Couture Joli-coeur v Oldcastle Building Products clarifies the evidentiary standards trademark owners must meet when responding to section 45 notices under Canada's Trademarks Act. This decision highlights critical distinctions between evidence of actual transfers versus mere advertising, and underscores the necessity of providing specific proof for each registered good to avoid expungement.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

Federal Court’s Decision Is Not A Wash

A Federal Court decision dismissed a patent infringement claim involving detergent formulations packaged in water-soluble film, finding problems with the plaintiff's experimental evidence and expert testimony. The court also invalidated certain patent claims for insufficient disclosure, ruling that the inventor failed to reveal which formulations succeeded or failed during the patent application process.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

Federal Court Grants Default Judgment And Awards $78,000 In Statutory Damages In Copyright Infringement Action.

A Federal Court decision highlights the critical importance of intellectual property clauses in consulting agreements, demonstrating how companies can face substantial statutory damages when they continue using copyrighted works after breaching payment terms with independent contractors. The case examines whether ongoing use of educational materials constitutes copyright infringement when no IP transfer was documented in the original contract.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

Supreme Court Of Canada Declines To Overturn Prohibition On Patenting Methods Of Medical Treatment

The Supreme Court of Canada has issued a landmark ruling on whether methods of medical treatment can be patented in Canada, addressing a long-standing prohibition that has shaped the country's intellectual property landscape. The decision examines the boundaries between patentable medical innovations and unpatentable professional medical judgment, with particular focus on dosing regimens and treatment protocols. This ruling provides critical guidance for pharmaceutical companies, patent practitioners, and h
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

TMOB Upholds Electronically Notarized Affidavit And Awards Costs For Misleading Legal Submissions

The Trademarks Opposition Board recently ruled on the validity of electronically notarized affidavits in trademark proceedings and imposed costs against a party for unreasonable conduct. The decision in Chilly Moose Ltd. v. Moosehead Breweries Limited addresses both the admissibility of remote notarization and the consequences of filing inaccurate legal submissions that complicate proceedings.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

CIPO Releases 2025 SME Roundtables Report

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office has released findings from roundtable discussions with 53 small and medium-sized businesses across six cities, revealing significant challenges in protecting intellectual property. Business owners identified cost, slow timelines, complexity, and limited knowledge as major barriers to accessing IP protection in Canada. CIPO plans to use this feedback to shape its upcoming business strategy and has already initiated a review of its fee structure.
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Article

CIPO Now Offers Certified Electronic Copies Of Canadian IP Documents

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office has introduced a digital certification service that transforms how applicants and rights holders obtain official IP documents. This new electronic system promises faster processing times and enhanced convenience compared to traditional paper-based methods. What does this mean for patent, trademark, industrial design, and copyright holders navigating IP prosecution and enforcement?
CanadaIntellectual Property
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala
Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala