The Common Hybrid Classificationproject of the

Pierre HeldDirectorate Classification (2.7.1.5)

IPC Workshop, 8-9 February 2010,WIPO, Geneva

The past (and still present...):Trilateral Harmony Project

Different classification schemes . . . in selected areas

ECLA FI USPC

. EPtext1 . JPtext1 . UStext1

. . EPtext2 . . JPtext2 . UStext2

. . EPtext3 . . JPtext3 . UStext3

. . . JPtext4

Trilateral Harmony project

. . . are merged and modifications discussed

HARMONY

. JPtext1

. UStext1

. . New text1

. . EPtext2

. . . New text2

. . JPtext3

ECLA

. JPtext1

. UStext1

. . New text1

. . EPtext2

. . . New text2

. . JPtext3

Trilateral Harmony project

Result:

3 separate but identical schemes

FI

. JPtext1

. UStext1

. . New text1

. . EPtext2

. . . New text2

. . JPtext3

USPC

. JPtext1

. UStext1

. . New text1

. . EPtext2

. . . New text2

. . JPtext3

ECLA

USPC

FI-FT

Core level20k

ReformedIPC

Advanced level 20k + 50k

Advanced level extension

20k + 50k + 70k

Integrate common scheme in the IPC

H

A

R

M

O

N

Y

SUMMARY: Trilateral Harmony Project

Goal:• identical (similar) schemes in JP, EP, US in selected fields

Method:• bring examiners together (virtual or physical)• first discuss & develop common scheme => ECLA, FI, USPC• then forward to IPC

• Contact, understanding, cooperation• New schemes highly match examiners' needs

• Very successful• Limited in scope, "Harmony islands", needs a lot of time resources

No new trilateral projects started! Completion planned by the end of 2011

The Future(and a bit already present...):

Common Hybrid Classification

Foundation

Project

The fiveIPoffices:

• European Patent Office (EPO)• Japan Patent Office (JPO)• Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)• State Intellectual Property Office of the People's

Republic of China (SIPO)• US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

The IP5 offices

History:

The IP5 Heads of Office met in Jeju, Korea in October

2008 where they cemented a vision and agreed a

roadmap.

" The elimination of unnecessary duplication of work among the IP5 offices, the enhancement of patent examination efficiency and quality and guarantee of the stability of patent right "

What are the conditions for reutilisation of others' work:

– Timeliness: Results available on time

– Quality: High quality of work essential

Presidents' agreement: 10 Foundation Projects

Project

Common documentation EPO-led

Common hybrid classification EPO-led

Sharing and documenting search strategies USPTO-led

Common search and examination support tools USPTO-led

Common access to search and examination results JPO-led

Common application format JPO-led

Common training policy KIPO-led

Mutual machine translation KIPO-led

Common rules for examination practice and quality control SIPO-led

Common statistical parameter system for examination SIPO-led

IP5 Governance

"Why bother? The EPO has ECLA"

. . . but:

Many documents don't have ECLA!

SS Results 1 240116 ..LIM A63B/IC 2 101982 1 NOT EC=YES 3 57458 2 AND JP/PN 4 15271 2 AND CN/PN 5 5530 2 AND KR/PN 6 4594 2 AND TW/PN 7 1861 2 AND AU/PN 8 2175 2 AND ES/PN 9 1364 2 AND RU/PN 10 1942 2 AND SU/PN

=> Need to use the IPC for retrieving prior art!

The non-ECLA part is growing:

=> Need to improve IPC!

Patent applications at IP5

0

250 000

500 000

750 000

1 000 000

1 250 000

1 500 000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

USPTO

SIPO

KIPO

JPO

EPO

987 000

1 452 000

Common Hybrid Classification Project

Goal:

Make the IPC really usable by all offices

The wish list:• Level of detail• Coverage• Consistency of use

The plan:

Cover most technical fields in 10+ years

Method• per field, select best existing local scheme (ECLA, FI, USPC?)• Agreement beforehand• Move subdivisions in IPC• Training & communication between offices

IPC ECLA

G10L

Variations• In one technical field, select from different local schemes

• Add newly created groups proposed by examiners (exceptional)

IPC

ECLA

G10L

FI

G10L13/03 . using - - -

Planning phase

October 2009: IP5 Working Group on Classification

5 pilot projects started in 2009/2010

STATUS

Project IPC Subject Rapporteur Basis IPCInitial

proposal

F001G11B 7/24-7/258

Optical recording media

EP EC/FI 18 79

F002 G11B7/12Optical recording heads

CN EC 9 40

F003 D04H

Making textile fabrics from fibres or filamentary material ...

JP FI 56 142

F004 G10L Speech recognition US EC/FI 38 195

F005 H01L31/04Light energy conversion devices

KR EC 16 38

Objectives of the pilot:

• Agree on common scheme

• Try out procedures

• Evaluate cost/benefit

IPC - How will it work with CHC?

Taking decisions on IPC:• IPC/WG and IPC/CE = "Parliament" of all offices,

administration by WIPO• IPC/WG: 2 meetings per year: scheme approval• IPC/CE: 1 meeting per year: policy, scheme adoption, date of entry

• Agreed CHC projects trigger IPC revision projects• CHC projects: main source for change

A "re-reform" to come• simplify core-advanced level structure• revise once per year (maybe twice)

CHC Foundation Project: Status

2nd IP5WGC 3rd IP5WGC

Oct 2009 Mar 2010

IPC/WG4th IP5WGC

May 2010

Sep 2010

Nov 2010

IPC/WGIPC/CE

Feb 2011

Evaluation of the pilot projects

Within the IP5

Agreement on schemeForwarding to IPC phase

Within the IPC community

Approval

Adoption

Jan 2012 or later

Entry into force

Reclassification

Start!

Example of timeline for the pilot projects (timeline will vary depending on the projects)

Summary: Common Hybrid Classification

• potentially quick; uses well-proven schemes• avoids long discussion on details• uses well-known IPC framework• takes countries CN, KR into account

• agreement US, EP, JP, CN, KR needed before starting

Timeline

• Phase I: 2009-2010 - Planning– Planning and identification of pilot projects– Develop requirements for a mapping and scheme

viewing tool– Set-up a training framework

• Phase II: 2010-2011 - Pilot projectsImplementation of pilot projects

The IP5 view Timeline

• Phase III: 2012-2016 - Start of Implementation

• Phase IV: 2017-2018 - Internal indexing schemes

• Phase V: 2019-2021 - Completion of CHC

Thank you for your attention!

P. Held

pheld@epo.org

Questions?