Turning ideas into assets

Danish Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Guidelines amended

Following a Plurilateral PPH Heads of Offices meeting at the USPTO in March 2011, the Danish Patent and Trademark Office (DKPTO) has amended its PPH Guidelines.

The Heads of Offices decided a new definition of “Claim correspondence” common to all PPH agreements/guidelines:

”All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the Office of First Filing (OFF).

Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the Office of Second Filing (OSF) are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the OFF, or the claims in the OSF are narrower in scope than the claims in the OFF.

In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when an OFF claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims).

A claim in the OSF which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the OFF is not considered to sufficiently correspond.  For example, the OFF claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the OSF are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the OSF claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.”.

The DK Guidelines for US, JP, Korean and Canadian users has been amended accordingly.

Read more about the Patent Prosecution Highways (PPH)