Indian Patent Office

Government Agency Under Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry

The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) generally known as the Indian Patent Office, is an agency under the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade which administers the Indian law of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks.

On 28 February 1856, the Government of India promulgated legislation to grant what was then termed as "exclusive privileges for the encouragement of inventions of new manufactures". On 3 March 1856, a civil engineer, George Alfred DePenning of 7, Grant's Lane, Calcutta petitioned the Government of India for grant of exclusive privileges for his invention — "An Efficient Punkah Pulling Machine". On 2 September, DePenning, submitted the Specifications for his invention along with drawings to illustrate its working. These were accepted and the invention was granted the first ever Intellectual Property protection in India.

Amendments (in 1999, 2002, 2005) were necessitated by India's obligations under TRIPS, allowing product patents in drugs and chemicals. A pre grant representation in addition to the existing post grant opposition has been re introduced. A provision of later amendments was on software patent ability, which was later withdrawn in another amendment in 2005. The amendment in 2012 focused on change in marks of Patent Agent Examination. Indian Patent Rules were amended in 2003, 2005, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2019 and 2020. The 2006 amendment of rules introduced reduced time lines and a fee structure based on specification size and number of claims, in addition to a basic fee. Indian Patent amendment rules 2012 was for amendments in criteria for patent agent exam qualification. Gazette Notification of Patent (Amendments) Rules 2013 has made necessary provisions for recognising Patent office as Examining authority and Searching authority on international level for filing, searching and examination of patent along with necessary fees. Patent amendment rules 2014 introduced a third category of applicant for small entities and revised the basic fee for filing a patent application. Patent amendment rule 2016 implemented on 16 May 2016, and introduced such as electronic communication to applicant/agent, and applicant can withdrawn their application using Form 29, and majorly introduced for the expedited examination for startup companies, and the timeline to put the grant of applicant has been reduced from 12 months to 6 months. In addition, video conference has been introduced for hearing the patent matters. Patent amendment rules 2019 introduced a patent agent shall submit all documents only by electronic transmission duly authenticated. Further, fee reductions for small entity, and fast track examination for specific applicants including female were introduced in 2019.

Term of every patent in India is 20 years from the date of filing of patent application, irrespective of whether it is filed with provisional or complete specification. However, in case of applications filed under PCT the term of 20 years begins from the International filing date accorded under PCT. Since the rights granted by an Indian Patent Office extends only throughout the territory of the India and ceases to have effect in a foreign country, an inventor who wishes patent protection in another country must apply for a patent in a specific country (according to its law) either through :PCT route or through conventional filing of application.

In order to keep the patent rights for the entire period, India's Patent Act has made it mandatory for the patent holders to pay a renewal fee. Once the patent is granted the patentee does not need to pay a renewal or maintenance fee for the first two years. The first renewal fee will be payable from the third year onwards. The patentee is also given a choice to pay the whole fees at a time or they can pay it every year. If in case the patent is not renewed by the company or individual, the patent ceases to exist and will be moved to the public domain. Restoration of a lapsed patent is relatively time taking and a complex procedure. The GI tag ensures that none other than those registered as authorised users (or at least those residing inside the geographic territory) are allowed to use the popular product name. In 2004–05, Darjeeling tea became the first GI tagged product in India and since then by July 2012, 178 had been added to the list.

The Indian Patent Office has implemented a modernisation program according to an Indian govt website. And according to this website "Efforts have been made to improve the working of the Patent Offices within the resources available and that the problem of backlog is also being attacked through 50% higher monthly target for disposal of patent applications per Examiner". E Filing of Patents & Trademarks is made possible and according to an Indian Minister the first phase of the modernisation comes to an end and the Indian Patent office wishes to be an International search Authority. The second phase of modernisation has been proposed with the aim of achieving US patent examination efficiency among others. Patent filings during the year 2007–08 were 35218.

As per an Indian patent attorney, patents which were beyond the Act were granted by the office. The Indian Patent office had an unusually high grant rate for the year 2005–06 in respect of numbers of refused patent applications compared to other major patent offices. The monthly target for Indian examiners is 30 new and amended applications per month and the Indian Patent Office strictly has only 12 months to grant/refuse the application as compared to foreign patent offices where applicants can extend the final date indefinitely. Knowledge commission, an Indian Government appointed body has recommended measures regarding the functioning of the office. The controversial promotion of examiners as assistant controllers has led to an imbalance in the set up with more controllers than examiners. Controller General had promised time bound promotions to officers and recruitment of new examiners to mitigate the crisis of lack of officers and the problem of attrition due to low pay and lack of promotion. Cases of corruption have been reported. In 2012, only 137 out of the announced 257 candidates expressed interest to join. The monthly target for examiners are 15 new cases(FERs) and 25 disposals which has led to officers working under tremendous pressure to show output thereby affecting the quality of grant of patents. Indian patent examiners have the higher workload and the pay is amongst the lowest. While a patent examiner in the European Patent Office would handle less than seven patent applications per month and a USPTO examiner would handle eight applications per month, an Indian examiner reportedly handles at least 40 applications a month. However an Indian examiner's monthly salary is less than a third of his/her counterparts in other foreign patent offices. The issue of attrition due to lack of promotion to examiners was acknowledged by the Minister of Commerce and Industry Nirmala Sitharaman during IP day celebrations. A concerned government official recommended outsourcing of search in view of increased work load and the IPO has started to outsource prior art searches violating the stipulations of the prevailing Patents Act. However, because of quality and legal issues with outsourcing, the outsourcing contracts were cancelled. The Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion under the Ministry of commerce, Government of India has come out with a discussion paper in order to address the issues plaguing the Indian Patent Office such as granting financial and administrative autonomy, separation of Patent and Trademark offices, setting up of additional offices are some of the issues put forth for input from stakeholders.

The IP Office's systems and processes in India have been under scrutiny for their lack of accessibility. They currently do not fully comply with the GIGW 3.0 guidelines and the BIS Standard (IS 17802). Persons with disabilities using screen readers encounter challenges when attempting to access the IP office online systems. On 29 November 2021, Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala, a Patent & Trademark Attorney with Blindness, initiated legal action against this issue by filing a Writ petition in the Karnataka High Court. His petition emphasized the need for the IP office's systems to be made accessible to persons with disabilities, ensuring that documents and emails are available in formats compatible with screen readers. The case has been registered as W. P. No. 21978/2021. In response to the concerns raised by Dr. Kalyan and the legal proceedings, the Office of Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trademarks (O/o CGPDTM) issued the Guidelines for Accessibility and Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities on 4 March 2022. These guidelines underscore their dedication to enhancing accessibility and providing reasonable accommodations for Persons with Disabilities practicing and interacting with IP Offices under O/o CGPDTM.