InternationalUSRemember you can easily switch between MIP US and MIP International at any time

Filing trends in Mexico




The following pages provide analysis of important intellectual property trends in Mexico, including a new law for industrial designs and geographical indications, the challenges of the new opposition system, and rulings interpreting patent claims. First, Michael Loney analyses recent filing trends

WIPO's World Intellectual Property Indicators 2017 report, released in December, features a wealth of data about worldwide filing trends. The report also includes a number of interesting details about filing trends in Mexico.

Patent trends

For the first time, more than 3 million patent applications were filed worldwide in a single year, up 8.3% from 2015

One interesting tidbit is that Mexico is one of the first offices out of the gate when it comes to the first office action on patent applications but it is one of the slowest for issuing a final decision. Average pendency time for first office action in Mexico is three months, which was behind only New Zealand's 1.3 months in the selected offices studied.

But Mexico was fifth-placed among countries studied for taking the longest to issue a final decision, behind Brazil, India, Czech Republic and Vietnam.

Patent grants by office and origin, and patents in force, 2016

Grants by office total Grants by office resident Grants by office non-resident Equivalent grants by origin In force by office
Mexico 8,652 423 8,229 950 109,238

Figure S5: Average pendency times for first office action and final decision at selected offices, 2016

Mexico IP filings (resident and abroad, including regional) and economy
Year Patent Trademark Industrial design GDP (constant 2011 US$)
2002 797 42,298 802 1520.09
2003 749 39,790 929 1541.72
2004 895 44,410 1,095 1607.94
2005 927 50,275 1,078 1656.71
2006 1,051 53,793 1,219 1738.62
2007 1,173 65,963 1,130 1794.33
2008 1,237 66,743 1,328 1819.46
2009 1,341 66,496 1,354 1733.94
2010 1,638 79,444 2,157 1822.54
2011 1,924 81,137 2,267 1896.26
2012 2,219 89,464 2,438 1972.45
2013 2,139 90,747 2,196 1999.28
2014 2,187 96,552 2,391 2044.57
2015 2,508 107,927 2,427 2098.33
2016 2,403 115,940 2,142 2146.65

Mexico had among the lowest share of processed applications that were rejected, along with Australia, Indonesia and Norway. "This can be explained in part by the high share of withdrawn/abandoned applications, where applicants decided to withdraw applications before they could be rejected," explained WIPO.

Among large middle-income origins, India (47.5%), Mexico (45.2%), Malaysia (42.5%), South Africa (28.9%) and Brazil (27.3%) have a high proportion of applications abroad as a share of total applications. The bulk of filings abroad from these origins were destined for the USPTO.

US applicants accounted for 51.3% of all non-resident applications filed in Mexico, a result of technological specialisation, proximity and market size influence cross-border applications. Only Norway (72.4%), Turkey (57.4%) and Canada (52.8%) had a larger percentage.

The WIPO report included data on the rate of women's participation in resident patent applications at national/regional offices, using a name-recognition technology developed by WIPO. Mexico had high rate of 36.4% of resident patent applications containing at least one woman, up from 22.7% in 2005.

Only the Russian Federation (38.7%) had a higher percentage. It was followed by the US (27.5%), Spain (24.6%) and Brazil (24.5%).

Commenting on the countries with the highest rate of women's participation on patent applciations, WIPO said: "These countries have a high share of total filings relating to life sciences such as biology, which show higher rates of woman participation than other branches of science and technology."


Comments






More from the Managing IP blog


null

null null null

null null null

Mid Year 2018

PTAB practice in a post-SAS world

The big questions remaining after the Supreme Court’s SAS ruling include how institution rates will change, how strategy at the Board should evolve, and how district courts and the Federal Circuit will react. Michael Loney investigates



Most read articles

Supplements