Most Canadian IP Office (CIPO) fees are going up ~25% on Jan 1, 2024, so there are savings to be had if applicants want to move any 2024 actions into 2023. For example, consider taking action on new filings, renewal fees, requests for examination, and any grant fees. Of course, it is a trade-off between taking no action and generally deferring costs versus taking action to avoid increased fees. Another consideration is that some organizations are not able to bring forward 2024 costs into 2023 without going over the 2023 budget.
There are a lot of different viewpoints on whether to pay these future fees and how much to pay. Here are some quick ideas for actions to take in 2023 for patents where the cost-benefit of taking action now may be justified:
- File Canadian patent and trademark applications due in 2024 if the applicant knows they will be filing in Canada (at least file the ones due early 2024). A downside is that this does bring forward the filing costs. We would recommend filing at least the Q1 and Q2 2024 filings since they are on the borderline, and the applicant should be close to making a go/no go decision on filing anyway.
- Pay at least the 2024 annual patent maintenance fees across the portfolio. The savings are greater for older patents since fees escalate over time. This can be a big saving on a large portfolio.
- File requests for examinations due in 2024. A downside is that this does bring forward examination costs sooner.
- Pay all grant fees that the applicant is currently aware of. If the applicant has gotten this far in the process, then they are probably going to pay the final fee.
Prune from the above list anything that can be abandoned. We believe in the old expression that a penny saved is a penny earned!
Written by Noel Courage
Partner, Bereskin & Parr, The Patent Lawyer Editorial Board Member
You may also like…
The second case of “calling for third-party opinions”
The procedure of calling for third-party opinions was introduced on April 1, 2022, in patent and utility model...
Revocation petition maintainable though no live patent subsisting: Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the petitioner, is engaged in manufacturing and marketing diverse pharmaceutical...
Delhi High Court reaffirm a ‘method of treatment of plants’ would not fall under the purview of ‘method of agriculture’
In the appeal of Syngenta Crop Protection Ag v. Assistant Controller Of Patents before the Delhi High Court, the...
Contact us to write for out Newsletter