On September 3, 2024, the rules applicable to patent applications, certificates of addition and divisional patent applications were formally organized, i.e. those that have been divided due to a strategy for their protection in isolation or a need pointed out by the examiner.

This regulation, which was previously separated into different documents, consolidates the provisions previously laid down, with a few additions, in a single regulation No. 14.

With regard to divisional patent applications, the basic provisions continue to require that they be formalized before the examination at first instance is concluded. This means that the divisional application must be submitted before a decision is issued on the original patent application, whether to grant, reject or definitively file it. In addition, the new regulation reinforces other important guidelines, such as:

– The deadline for submitting a divisional application does not apply to ex officio applications for division;

– Any attempt to divide an application that is itself already considered a divisional application will be automatically rejected;

– The divisional application will follow the same procedural stage as the original patent application, which means that the annual fees and examination fees for the divisional application must be paid in accordance with the procedural stage at which the original application is located;

– The matter claimed in the divisional application must be excluded from the original patent application in order to avoid duplication.

Another noteworthy point introduced by Regulation 14 is the requirement for the applicant to submit a comparative copy of the claims contained in the divisional application and those contained in the original application. This copy must clearly indicate the parts removed, as well as the parts added or replaced, thus ensuring greater transparency in the process of analyzing and examining applications.

At the same time, Regulation 16 was published, introducing some changes to the examination guidelines, although without any significant impact on the provisions relating to divisional patent applications.

Although this is not an entirely new regulatory scenario, it is essential that holders of patent applications and certificates of addition are aware of the procedural requirements in force, in order to ensure that their applications are fully compliant with the new guidelines. Failure to comply with these provisions can lead to negative consequences in the processing of applications, which may include requirements that increase examination time or even rejection.

For more information on the impact of these changes on your assets, please contact our team (araripe@araripe.com.br).

The National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) recently published Ordinances/INPI/PR No. 26/2023 and No. 27/2023, bringing important changes to the procedures for registering Industrial Property and franchising contracts.

The new rules, the result of deliberations held in December 2022, aim to simplify and streamline the processes for registering and recording contracts, boosting innovation and the protection of Industrial Property in the country.

In another post, we talked about the main changes discussed, such as “E-notarization” and “e-apostille” in cases of digital signatures without ICP-Brasil Certification, the presentation of bylaws in articles of association or articles of incorporation of Brazilian companies and the licensing of non-patented technology (“Know-how”).

Want to know more about how these changes apply to your business? Contact us and speak to one of our specialist lawyers.

#advogado #franquia #araripeadvogados #advogados

When producing content on the Internet, it is necessary to think about various legal factors so that third party rights are not infringed, especially with regard to Copyright.

It is imperative to identify, for example, in the image used, the origin of the publication, as well as the type of license of use, checking if there is permission for commercial use or for modifications, if applicable.

If any violation is found, it is possible to notify the alleged infringers to cease the improper use of the work, but any financial compensation must be negotiated between the parties or explored in a separate legal action, in which the alleged infringer is guaranteed the right to an adversarial proceeding and a full defense.

The unilateral imposition of a fine for improper use of copyrighted works in Brazil is therefore not accepted by the national judiciary, which recently ruled that it is impossible to collect the fine without an agreement or contract, since such unilateral collection is not regulated by the Brazilian Copyright Law.

The ruling, from the 2nd Special Civil Court of Cuiabá, of the Mato Grosso Court of Justice, also condemned the company representing the images’ author to pay compensation for moral damages for undue collection.

Case No: 1061742-57.2022.8.11.0001
Plaintiff: MARIA APARECIDA TEIXEIRA LYRA
Defendant: PICRIGHTS BRASIL – INTERMEDIAÇÃO DE NEGÓCIOS DE IMAGEM E DIREITO AUTORAL