China

China had 245,161 invention patent applications in 2007. An increasing proportion were from Chinese, up from 58% in 2006 to 63% in 2007. Chinese nabbed 47% of the grants from the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) in 2007.

Plaintiffs do well in China, prevailing 75% of the time. Pfizer's Viagra lost patent protection from SIPO, but that was overturned by the Beijing Intermediate Court, in a decision upheld by the High Court. On the other end of the stick, France-based Schneider Electric was jolted $45 million US for infringing five patents owned by Chint Group in a home court win; the largest award in a Chinese patent suit yet. Schneider vowed to appeal.

India

India has the U.S. patent disease writ small: burgeoning applications with rising pendency and atrocious examiner attrition. Unlike the U.S., the grant percentage is rising, though examination rigor is questionable.

While 80% of Indian patent applications are by foreigners, USPTO filings by Indians is rising.

Switzerland-based Novartis is struggling to maintain patent protection for Glivec, it's anti-cancer drug.

At the beginning of 2006, following a pre-grant opposition proceeding, the Indian patent office rejected Novartis's application to patent Glivec under the provisions of Section 3 (d) of the Patent Act. This states that 'the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance which does not result in the enhancement of the known efficacy of that substance, or the mere discovery of any new Property or new use for a known substance or of the mere use of a known process, machine or apparatus unless such known process results in a new product or employs at least one new reactant,' is not patentable. Novartis claimed that in placing additional requirements for patentability beyond novelty, commercial applicability and non-obviousness, India's Patent Law is not TRIPs-compliant. Novartis took its case to the Madras High Court and, at the same time, asked the court to overturn the office's original decision

The Novartis case, now before the newly created Intellectual Property Appellate Board, is unsettled.

Japan

The Japan Patent Office (JPO) patent office reported a 4.3% drop in patent applications in 2007; JPO figured that companies were more often preferring trade secret protection. Still JPO has a pendency problem: time to first action is currently 27 months, and expected to rise. JPO approval rate is declining, at 48.5% in 2006 compared to 51.9% in 2002.

Enforcement in Japan is a most often an exercise in patent hara-kiri: 90% are sliced by invalidity at the district court level. Japanese patent attorneys have observed that the current crop of patents being asserted were granted under a lower standard than applied now; hajimemashite (pleased to meet you) KSR, Tokyo style. It was reported that, on appeal, "patents are affirmed 80 per cent of the time."

Europe

The old dog's old trick at the European Patent Office (EPO) is to jack the cost of patenting to cover fiscal deficit. But some changes are in the offing that will enhance patenting.

[A]t the end of 2007, the EPC 2000 -- the revised version of the European Patent Convention -- came into force. Although it has little effect on substantive patent law in Europe, EPC 2000 will have a significant impact on procedure, including the elimination of the need for translations during the application stage, and the elimination of the need to file drawings, claims and a description to obtain a filing date for a European patent (instead applicants can refer to previously submitted material in other countries). Of great significance is that communications between European patent attorneys and their clients will now be subject to privilege. Previously this had not been automatically the case and was instead a case for national jurisdiction.

United States

If you've been reading the Patent Prospector, you know all about what's going on. Patent approval rate is down to 51% in 2007, from a high of 72% in 2000. Jon "The Dud" Dudas, PTO director, is loathed by the patent bar for attempting illegal examination regime changes.

Meanwhile the Supreme Court was busy dancing on the heads of patent punks in 2007, making "mommy, make him stop" declaratory judgment easy (MedImmune), and raising the bar of obviousness so high that invalidity limbo now works standing on tip toes (KSR).

Intellectual Asset Magazine report: html; pdf.