2013 - משרד המשפטיםindex.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ILPO/Main Docs/AnnualReport2013Eng... · In 2013 the Patent Formalities Department’s capabilities were ... during 2013

Israel Patent Office Annual Report

2013

Ministry of JusticeThe Israel

Patent Office

2013 Israel Patent OfficeAnnual Report The Israel

Patent Office

2

3

4

Preface from the Director of the Israel Patent Office

The Israel Patent Office (ILPO) is glad to present to the users and stakeholders in the field of industrial intellectual

property in Israel its annual report summarizing its main activities in 2013.

Differing from other years, this report focuses on quantitative data regarding the ILPO’s main activities which were

found to attract the public attention. We hope that this focus will serve best the readers and will expose the data to a

wider crowd.

Patent Examination

2013 has been the first full work year of the ILPO operating as an International Searching and Preliminary Examining

Authority (ISA/IPEA) under the PCT. Throughout the year many resources were allocated for compliance with this new

task, while the department strove to keep meeting its preceding objectives regarding the amount of first examinations

of national phase applications and time frames for re-examination of these applications.

At the end of 2013, 21 cadets successfully finished their cadet course exams thus ending a two years period of studying

and training. They began operating as patent examiners, in the scope of 101 qualified and certified patent examiners

at the ILPO.

2013 was marked by targeted efforts to maintain and improve the quality of the examinations, through improvement

of the examination procedures and the building of a phrases database that addresses most of the office actions,

and by keeping a strict policy regarding periodic and continuous quality checks, performed in different stages of the

examination. In addition, during the past year the department has expanded the number of search databases available

to the examiners, including the Asia Translation Collection database which grants access to all the Patent applications

from China, Japan and South Korea.

In 2013 the Patent Formalities Department’s capabilities were enhanced by a document scanning capability designed to

support the examination of online patent applications, which will be displayed for public viewing on the ILPO website.

This is another step towards transition into a fully integrated online system for online service expected to become

operational during 2014.

PCT

Overall, 2013 shows an increase in the number of international applications filed by Israeli applicants to the ILPO as

their Receiving Office, which amounts to 1,199 applications (compared to 1,062 applications in 2012). Furthermore,

the ILPO’s international operations of ISA/IPEA have increasingly developed, gaining a high designation rate of 55% of

5

Israel Patent Office Annual Report 2013

Israeli applicants, who are free to choose between the ILPO, EPO and the USPTO. In addition, during 2013, 192 Israeli

applicants, who filed their applications via the International Bureau in Geneva, have designated the ILPO as their ISA/

IPEA. These figures indicate the growing confidence of the Israeli applicants in the ILPO’s capabilities.

Over the past year updates were made to the PCT Department’s computer system in order to improve the efficiency of

the formal as well the substantial PCT examination and to reduce the possibility for human errors. In this year, 92% of

the applications filed with the ILPO as a receiving office, were filed online via the department’s electronic filing system.

Design

2013 was characterized by intensive training of new cadets and by specifying and developing a new information and

operation system, expected to become operational in the midst of 2014. These investments in infrastructure, some of

which carried out in light of the expected enactment of a new Design Law that was published as memorandum for

public comments in 2013, have led to a certain time increase in pendency for the examinations. However, it appears that

the short pendency delays will bring to future improvement of the department’s overall work.

Trademarks

2013 was marked by a high work load, resulting from the dramatic increase in the number of classes filed in Israel by

international applicants for registration via the Madrid Protocol. This trend has been on the rise for several years – in

2010, 9,942 classes were filed, in 2011 the number rose to 15, 542 classes, in 2012 16,884 classes and in 2013 the

number increased to 18,409 filed classes.

In light of this uptrend, the department invested its efforts in increasing the amounts of classes examined. In 2012 9,258

classes were examined in first examination and 7,514 classes in second examination. Nevertheless, in 2013 the number

went up to 17,281 classes examined in first examination and 10,299 classes examined in second examination, with no

significant increase in the department’s personnel.

International Activities

Throughout 2013 the ILPO continued to deepen and extend the scope of cooperation with foreign Patent Offices and

International Organizations on one hand and with Academic institutions and the applicants on the other hand. In such

scope, in May 2013 the ILPO conducted a seminar on conflict resolution in cooperation with WIPO and the Law Faculty

of the Hebrew University and in June 2013 a training seminar on Electronic Filing was held in the PCT Department.

The ILPO takes part in several PPH arrangements aimed at expediting and improving patent examination procedures

through cooperation between patent offices. In 2013 the ILPO started initiating further PCT PPH arrangements

designed to use the outcomes of the ISA/IPEA. The ILPO currently holds PPH and PCT PPH arrangements with the

6

Patent Offices of the United States, Finland, Denmark, Canada and Japan. During 2013 the ILPO began operating PPH

PCT arrangements also with the Patent offices of South Korea and Spain.

In 2013 the ILPO prepared and launched communication capability with WIPO CASE, a global system for data transfer

between Patent offices around the world. This capability is expected to contribute to improving and shortening national

phase application, starting 2014 onwards.

Every year, the ILPO organizes an in-house one-week course for examiners from foreign Patent Offices who are

sponsored by the WIPO Academy. The course provides insight into the legal and professional issues that are at the

focal point of IP registration in Israel, with particular emphasis on the area of Pharmaceuticals related innovations.

In 2013 twelve examiners and department managers participated in the course. Ten participants arrived through the

WIPO Academy from Central and South America (Argentina, Chile, Guatemala), Eastern Europe (Croatia and Ukraine),

Asia (Nepal, Philippines and Vietnam) and Africa (Kenya and Uganda), along with two examiners who were invited as

part of the ILPO’s relations with the Patent Office of the PRC, SIPO.

Improving the ILPO website

During 2013 an extensive amount of work was put into improvement of the ILPO website and its accessibility to the

general public. Among other improvements, the website was added with a search component indicating the progress

status of returning requests examinations per each examiner.

Quality Assurance in the ILPO

In 2013 all of the ILPO departments and activities have successfully passed the annually certification review for the

ISO 9001 quality standard conducted by the Standards Institution of Israel. Maintaining quality is a continuous process

in which, among other things, the ILPO departments conduct training and update internal work procedures. Significant

parts of these procedures are open for public review in our website.

As part of its commitment to quality and improvement, in the beginning of 2013 the ILPO conducted a satisfaction

survey among its website users for 2012, and was graded 4.11 points out of 5, an increase of 8% from the previous

survey of 2011. Compared with that former survey, the results indicate quality improvement in some departments

and quality decrease in others. Accordingly, during 2013 the ILPO under took corrective actions to Improve quality in

various departments.

7


As shown in the above text and from the variety of data specified in this report, the ILPO remains oriented to improving

the service provided to the public in the various fields under its responsibilities. For these efforts and in particular for its

achievements in connection with establishing the new operations as ISA/IPEA, in 2013 the ILPO received the tribute for

outstanding units in streamlining and reducing bureaucracy from the Israeli Civil Service Commission.

Ensuring an effective registration system of industrial intellectual property rights provides an essential contribution to

sustaining Israel’s status as a leader in technological innovation. For that instance, in 2013 Israel has maintained its no.

14th position in the GII, the global innovation index of WIPO.

This report provides merely a glimpse of the ILPO widespread activity in 2013 – a fruitful activity that was achieved

through the considerable efforts of all ILPO employees, to whom this report is dedicated.

Sincerely,

Asa Kling

Director of the Israel Patent Office

8

Table of content

1. Patent and PCT Departments

a. Examinations Data

b. Acceleration of Examinations

c. Legal Proceedings in the Patent Department

d. Administrative Decisions Issued by the PCT Department

e. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of Patents

f. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of PCT

2. Designs Department


b. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of Designs

3. Trademarks Department


b. Legal Proceedings in the Trademarks Department

c. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of Trademarks

• Freedom of Information Law

The information presented in this annual report is aimed at giving the reader an overview of the activities carried out at the Israel Patent Office and the scope of the legal framework within which it acts. The report is not meant to provide any legal advice or exhaustive review of the law. As such, this report does not present a comprehensive analysis of the ILPO’s policies but a general basic description is provided.

13

14

33

40

43

44

49

55

56

65

67

68

81

82

86

9


List of Charts

Chart 1. Patent Applications Filed vs. Patents Granted in 2003-2013

Chart 2. Patent Applications Claiming Priority Right Filed at the ILPO in 2003-2013

Chart 3. Average Pendency (months) for First Examination in 2003-2013 (by classification)

Chart 4. Average Pendency (months) for Second Examination of Applications 2003-2013 (by classification)

Chart 5. Average of Total Time from Beginning of Examination (months) in Patent Application in 2006-2013

(by classification)

Chart 6. Average of Total Time from Beginning of Examination (months) in Patent Application in 2006-2013

(by fields)

Chart 7. Patent Applications Filed in 2013 (by fields)

Chart 8. Designation of International Search Authorities by Israeli Applicants in 2003-2013

Chart 9. Punctuality in Sending International Search Reports (ISR’s) to the International Bureau (IB) in 2012

Chart 10. Israeli Applicants vs. Foreign Applicants in 2003-2013

Chart 11. Patents Granted to Israeli Applicants vs. Patents Granted to Foreign Applicants in 2003-2013

Chart 12. Patent Applications Closed in 2012-2013 (by fields)

Chart 13. Patent Applications Actively Abandoned by the Applicant in 2011-2013

Chart 14. Use of Section 17(c) to the Patents Law in 2006-2013 (by fields)

Chart 15. Received Applications via Section 17(c) to the Patents Law vs. All Received Applications in 2006-2013

Chart 16. Status of Accelerated Examination Applications According to Regulation 35 to the Patents Regulations in

2008-2013

Chart 17. Amount of Patent Applications in the Status of “Green Application” for Accelerated Examination in 2010-

2013

14

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

24

24

31

32

33

34

35

36

10

Chart 18. Divisional Applications in 2011-2013 (by classifications)

Chart 19. Divisional Applications in 2011-2013 (by fields)

Chart 20. Patent of Addition Applications in 2011-2013 (by classifications)

Chart 21. Amount of Oppositions vs. the Amount of Patent Applications Granted in 2003-2013

Chart 22. Amount of Oppositions filed in 2003-2013 (by classifications)

Chart 23. Total Patent Applications Filed in 2012 – by Office of Origin (Israel ranked 24th)

Chart 24. Total Patent Granted in 2012 – by Office of Origin (Israel ranked 21st)

Chart 25. Total Patents in Force in 2012 (Israel ranked 24th)

Chart 26. Rate of Patent Applications in 2012 by Fields: Israel vs. the Rest of the World

Chart 27. Patent Applications per US $ 1.0 Billion GNP in 2012 (Israel ranked 29th)

Chart 28. PCT Application Filed in the Israeli Receiving office in 1996-2013

Chart 29. PCT Applications by Method of Filing in 2011-2013 (by percentage)

Chart 30. PCT Applications in 2012 – by Receiving Office (Israel ranked 17th)

Chart 31. PCT Applications in 2012 – by Country of Origin (Israel ranked 17th)

Chart 32. Timeliness in Transmitting PCT Applications to the International bureau in 2012 (Israel ranked 2nd)

Chart 33. Rate of PCT Applications in 2012 by Fields: Israel vs. the Rest of the World

Chart 34. Design Applications vs. Registered Designs in 2003-2013

Chart 35. Design Applications Filed in 2013 – by Classification

Chart 36. Registered Designs in 2013 – by Classifications

Chart 37. Average Pendency for Design First Examination in 2008-20013 (months)

Chart 38. Design Applications in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 25th)

Chart 39. Registered Designs in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 31st)

37

38

39

40

40

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

56

62

63

64

65

66

11


Chart 40. Trademarks Applications and Registered Trademarks in 2003-2013

Chart 41. Applications and New Classes Filed and Registered Trademarks and Classes in 2003-2013

Chart 42. Trademarks Application in 2013 – by Classes

Chart 43. Registered Trademarks in 2013 – by Classes

Chart 44. National and International Applications closed in 2013

Chart 45. Application examined in First and Second Examinations and Pendency (in days) for these Examinations in

2010-2013

Chart 46. Trademarks in Force Including Classes in Israel in 2003-2013

Chart 47. Total Trademarks Registered in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 46th)


Chart 49. Designation of International Application Filed through the Madrid Protocol in 2012 – by Countries (Israel

ranked 19th)

Chart 50. Trademarks in Force World Wide in 2012 - by countries (Israel ranked 30th)

68

69

76

77

78

79

80

82

83

84

8

12

List of Tables

Table 1. Patent Applications Filed and Granted in the ILPO in 2013 – by Country of Origin

Table 2. Leading Foreign Applicants in Filing Patent Applications in 2013

Table 3. Leading Foreign Applicants that Obtained Patent Registration in 2013

Table 4. Leading Domestic Applicants in Filing Patent Applications in 2013

Table 5. Leading Domestic Applicants that Obtained Patent Registration in 2013

Table 6. Leading Applicants in Filing PCT Applications at the ILPO as Receiving Office in 2013

Table 7. Pending Legal Proceedings in the ILPO by the End of 2013

Table 8. Status of Oppositions to Patent Applications During 2013

Table 9. Administrative Decisions Issued at the PCT Department in 2013

Table 10. Design Applications Filed and Registered at the ILPO in 2013 – by Countries

Table 11. Design Applications Filed at the ILPO in 2013 – by Classifications

Table 12. Trademarks Applications Filed in 2013 – by Countries

Table 13. Leading Applicants in Filing Trademarks Applications in 2013

Table 14. Leading Applicants in Registration of Trademarks in 2013

Table 15. Legal Proceedings Regarding Trademarks in 2013

22

25

26

27

28

29

41

41

43

57

59

70

74

75

81

Patent and PCT Departments

14

a. Examination Data

Chart 1. Patent Applications Filed vs. Patents Granted in 2003-2013

2013 witnessed a decline of 9% in the amount of patent applications filed in Israel. This decline continues a trend dating

back to 2011. It should be noted that starting from 2012 there has been a change in the application fees, establishing a

discount for companies having a turn-over of less then 10 Million NIS.

The number of granted patents in 2013 is greater than the number of granted patents in 2012, as a result of streamlining

the applications’ preparation process and due to reducing the average examination time.

Chart 2. Patent Applications Claiming Priority Right Filed at the ILPO in 2003-2013

0

2 ,000

4 ,000

6 ,000

8 ,000

10 ,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

5,86

1

6,44

1

6,84

4

7,54

7

8,05

1

7,78

9

6,80

0

7,30

0

6,88

5

6,79

3

6,18

4

1,71

9

2,34

8

2,26

1

2,62

1

2,64

1

1,90

6

2,01

3

2,29

1

5,10

5

3,38

6

3,69

8

Patent Applications Granted Patents

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

4,734 5,069

5,473 6,202

6,731 6,581

5,722 6,222 5,891 5,778

5,294

1,127

1,372 1,371

1,345

1,320 1,208

1,078

1,078 994 1,015

889

Applications Claiming Priority Right Other Patent Applications

15


Chart 3. Average Pendency (in months) for First Examination in 2003-2013 (by classification)

Chart 3 indicates that during 2013 the streamlining in patent examiners work continued, resulting in reducing the

pendency for first examination to an average of 28 months. This streamlining took place despite the additional work

load added to the department, following the ILPO transition to an International Searching and Preliminary Examining

Authority.

This time reduction trend is evident in the fields of Biotechnology and Chemistry, which account for most of the

applications filed at the ILPO. However, in the fields of Mechanics, Electronics, Telecommunications and Medical

Devices there has been a considerable difficulty to reduce time, due to human resources limitations in specific units and

as a result of the number increase of international applications filed in these fields.

The status of the second examinations is being published in a quarterly report at the following link –

http://index.justice.gov.il/Units/RashamHaptentim/Units/patent/DochBchinot/Pages/StatusBochanim_NEW.aspx

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

50.2

51.2

46.4 40.4 35.7 34

32 5 28

46 48.5

46.4

41.7 38.3 36

34.7 30.4

64.9

59

46.2

33.3 27.3

24 24.4 24.2

47.8 48.7 46.6 43

37.5 36.3 33.4

26.8 .

Average Mechanics, Electronics, IT, Medical Devices Biotechnology Chemistry

16

Chart 4. Average Pendency (in months) for Second Examination of Applications 2003-2013

(by classification)

In 2013, 9,927 second examination of applications were carried out by patent examiners. As a result, the average

pendency for second examination hasn’t changed and remained at an average of 5.6 months, the same as in 2012.

By doing so, the ILPO has met the goal set by its Supervisory Committee, determining that during 2013 the average

Pendency for second examination shall not exceed 6 months.

In 2013, a search tool allowing the applicant to review the status of second examinations was added to the ILPO

website at the following link –

http://index.justice.gov.il/Units/RashamHaptentim/Units/patent/DochBchinot/Pages/StatusBochanim_NEW.aspx

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

12.7

9.9 9.9 10

10.1 9.7

5.6 5.6

10.1

7

8.6 8.4

10 10.3

5.9 5.1

12.6

10.8 10.6 10.6 10.6

9.9

5.4 5.6

14

10.7 10 10.4 9.7 9

5.5 6.4

Average Biotechnology Chemistry Mechanics, Electronics, IT, Medical Devices

17


Chart 5. Average of Total Time from Beginning of Examination (months) in Patent Application

in 2006-2013 (by classification)

Chart 5 indicates that the average of the total time of handling a patent application keeps declining. However, in the

Biotechnology field there is a significant increase in such time, due to allocating of resources for examination of PCT

applications, rather then focusing solely on national applications.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

24

20

23 23

27 28

32

37

21 18

20

22 22 21

29

27

17 17.1 18

20 19 17.5

25.2 23.3

19.5

17.9

19.5 21.1 21.3 20.4

27.6 26.8

Biotechnology Chemistry Mechanics, Electronics, IT, Medical Devices Average

18

Chart 6. Average of Total Time from Beginning of Examination (months) in Patent Application in 2006-

2013 (by fields)

A Human Necessities

B Performing Operations; Transporting

C Chemistry; Metallurgy

D Textiles; Paper

E Fixed Constructions

F Mechanical Engineering; Lighting; Heating; Weapons; Blasting

G Physics

H Electricity

Classification of fields taken from the WIPO website http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/classifications/ipc/en/guide/guide_ipc.pdf

16

16

16

13

15

14

15

14

12

17

15

17

15

18

16 16

13

19

17

19

16

17 18

16

20

14

17

20

17

20

18

20

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

A B C D E F G H

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

20 20 20

19


Chart 7. Patent Applications filed in 2013 (by fields)

In 2013 the number of application in the fields of IT and Telecommunications showed a 15% increase in comparison to

2012. It is also evident that in 2013 the Life Science fields occupied the bulk share of patent applications filed in Israel.

1,865

457

1,703

32 92

276

671

484

A - Human Necessities

B -Performing Operations; Transporting

C - Chemistry; Metallurgy

D - Textiles; Paper

E - Fixed Constructions

F -Mechanical Engineering; Lighting; Heating; Weapons; Blasting G - Physics

H - Electricity

20

Chart 8. Designation of International Search Authorities by Israeli Applicants in 2003-2013

The data for 2006-2011 are taken from WIPO database. The data regarding 2012 onwards are taken from the ILPO database. The data do

not include the applications received directly at WIPO’s International Bureau.

2013 has been the first year of full service of the International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authority, after

the ILPO started providing that service in June 2012. At this point, these services are being provided solely to Israeli

Applicants. The chart shows that in about 55% of the PCT applications filed by Israeli applicants the ILPO was elected

as the designated search authority. This demonstrates the high confidence of the Israeli applicants in the quality of

examination performed at the ILPO, which in turn provides competitive services to the applicants.

It should be noted that many applicants are returning costumers. This perseverance may find anchor in the ILPO’s

commitment to maintaining quality and punctuality as shown in the following chart no. 9, showing that the ILPO

ranked 7th worldwide (out of 18 ISAs) in terms of meeting the obligatory 3 months term according to the PCT

regulations. In 2013, around 90% of the reports were forwarded on time. It should be noted that the remaining 10% of

the applications were delayed more than three months mainly due to security clearance reasons.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

269

658 674

754

1031

889

744 761

424

321

913

979

850

652 712

661

420

220

ILPO** EPO USPTO

21


Chart 9. Punctuality in Sending International Search Reports (ISR) to the International Bureau (IB)

in 2012

This figure is taken from WIPO Economic and Statistics Series, 2013 PCT Yearly Review – The International Patent System

22

Table 1. Patent Applications Filed and Granted in the ILPO in 2013 – by Country of Origin

Country PCT Applications Entering National phase in Israel

Patent Applications

Filed Granted Filed Granted

Austria 0 12 13 1

Australia 62 36 0 0

Belgium 1 4 0 0

Bermuda 0 0 0 1

Brazil 3 2 0 0

British Virgin Islands 0 0 1 0

Bulgaria 1 0 0 0

Canada 59 26 0 5

Central African Republic 0 0 1 0

Croatia 3 1 0 0

Cuba 2 0 0 0

Cyprus 0 0 1 1

Czech Republic 6 1 0 0

Denmark 12 22 0 0

European Patent Organization

(EPO)

1,149 696 0 0

Finland 17 14 0 0

France 82 91 30 21

Germany 23 15 13 19

Greece 3 0 1 0

Hong Kong 0 0 1 1

Hungary 10 4 0 0

Iceland 0 1 0 0

India 21 11 0 0

International Bureau 394 150 0 0

Ireland 0 2 0 0

Israel 390 282 818 312

Italy 12 12 8 5

Japan 203 141 8 10

23


Kazakhstan 1 0 0 0

Luxemburg 0 0 1 0

Mexico 1 2 0 0

Moldova 1 0 0 0

Netherlands 30 18 2 8

New Zealand 4 1 0 0

Norway 4 7 0 0

Panama 0 0 1 0

People’s Republic of China

(PRC)

46 15 1 2

Poland 8 1 0 0

Portugal 2 1 1 0

Russia 17 7 0 0

Singapore 13 2 3 0

Slovenia 0 0 1 0

Spain 13 19 8 2

Sweden 50 40 0 2

Switzerland 15 15 12 10

Republic of Korea (ROK) 38 32 1 3

South Africa 4 0 0 0

Taiwan 0 0 3 3

The Bahamas 0 0 0 2

Tunisia 1 0 0 0

Turkey 2 1 1 0

Ukraine 2 1 0 0

United Kingdom 149 130 10 6

United States 2,232 1,353 153 115

Total Applications Filed: 6,179

Patent Applications: 1,093

PCT Applications: 5,086

Total Patents Granted: 3,697

From Patent Applications: 529

From PCT Applications: 3,186

24

Chart 10. Israeli Applicants vs. Foreign Applicants in 2003-2013

Chart 11. Patents Granted to Israeli Applicants vs. Patents Granted to Foreign Applicants in 2003-2013

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

81.5 82.4 84 85.5 86.6 87.7 87.3 88.5 88.5 88.6 88.8

18.5 17.6 16 14.5 13.4 12.3 12.7 11.5 11.5 11.4 11.2

Applications filed by Foreign applicants Applications filed by Israeli applicants

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

83.1 83.4 82.8 87 86.9 82.6 83.5 85.2 85 85.6 86 84

16.9 16.6 17.2 13 14.1 13.4 16.5 14.8 15 14.4 14 16

Patents Granted to Foreign applicants

Patents Granted to Israeli applicants

25


Table 2. Leading Foreign Applicants in Filing Patent Applications in 2013

Company name Number of Applications

1. Nestec S.A. 98

2. Qualcomm Incorporated 79

3. Novartis Ag 64

4. Dow Agrosciences LLC 58

5. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh 56

6. Bayer Intellectual Property Gmbh 51

7. Microsoft Corporation 47

8. Basf Se 46

9. Xyleco, Inc. 40

10. Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. 35

11. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ag 35

12. Genentech, Inc. 34

13. Merck Patent Gmbh 29

14. Sanofi 29

15. Boehringer Ingelheim International Gmbh 28

16. Abbvie Inc. 28

17. Abbott Laboratories 26

18. Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson (Publ) 25

19. Syngenta Participations Ag 23

20. Thales 22

26

Table 3. Leading Foreign Applicants that Obtained Patent Registration in 2013

Company Name Number. of Patents

1. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. 62

2. Qualcomm Incorporated 48

3. Interdigital Technology Corporation 39

4. Raytheon Company 37

5. Janssen Pharmaceutica NV 36

6. Novartis AG 32

7. Biosense Webster, Inc. 31

8. Microsoft Corporation 31

9. Sanofi 31

10. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma Gmbh & Co. KG 25

11. Basf Se 24

12. Honeywell International Inc. 23

13. Nestec S.A. 22

14. Genentech, Inc. 21

15. Pfizer, Inc. 21

16. Astra Zeneca AB 20

17. IBM Corporation 20

18. Merck Serono S.A. 19

19. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company 18

20. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh 18

27


Table 4. Leading Domestic Applicants in Filing Patent Applications in 2013

Company Name No. of Applications

1. Biosense Webster (Israel) Ltd. 56

2. Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. 35

3. Yeda Research and Development Co. Ltd. 25

4. Elta Systems Ltd. 19

5. Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew University of

Jerusalem Ltd. 14

6. Private Applicant 13


8. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. 12



28

Table 5. Leading Domestic Applicants that Obtained Patent Registration in 2013

Company Name No. of Patents

1. Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd. 31

2. Rafael-Advanced Defense Systems Ltd 22

3. Iscar Ltd. 21

4. Elbit Systems Ltd. 18

5. Given Imaging Ltd. 14

6. Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew

University of Jerusalem Ltd.

14

7. Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. 12

8. Ben Gurion University of the Negev Research and Development

Authority 9

9. Netafim Ltd. 9

10. Technion Research and Development Foundation Ltd. 8

29


Table 6. Leading Applicants in Filing PCT Applications at the ILPO as Receiving Office in 2013

Rank in

2013

Applications in

2013Name

Applications in

2012

1 37 Yeda Research and Development Co. Ltd. 29

2 35 Ramot at Tel-Aviv University Ltd. 29

3 35Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew

University of Jerusalem Ltd.33

4 31 Iscar Ltd. 20

5 24 Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. 7

6 15 Technion Research and Development Foundation Ltd. 11

7 14Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Research &

Development Authority12

8 13 Elta Systems Ltd. 11

8 13 Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. 14

8 13 Landa Corporation Ltd. 0

9 12The State of Israel, Ministry of Agriculture & Rural

Development, Agricultural Research Organization4

9 12 Better Place Gmbh 5

10 11 Given Imaging Ltd. 4

11 10Hadasit Medical Research Services & Development

Company Ltd. 4

12 9 Powermat Technologies Ltd. 7

13 8 Primesense Ltd 0

13 8 N-Trig Ltd. 6

13 8 Bromine Compounds Ltd. 6

14 7 Medimop Medical Projects Ltd. 6

14 7 Galtronics Corporation Ltd. 5

14 7Tel Hashomer Medical Research, Infrastructure and Services

Ltd.5

30

14 7 Private Applicants -

15 6 Vasona Networks Inc. 0

15 6 A.B. Seeds Ltd. 1

16 5 Advanced Inhalation Therapies (AIT) Ltd. 0

16 5 Brightway Vision Ltd. 1

16 5 Hewlett-Packard Industrial Printing Ltd. 8

16 5 Nova Measuring Instruments Ltd. 4

16 5 Phinergy Ltd. 1

16 5 Sensible Medical Innovations Ltd. 1

31


Chart 12. Patent Applications Closed in 2012-2013 (by fields)

A Human Necessities



D Textiles; Paper



G Physics

H Electricity

Classification of fields taken from the WIPO website http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/classifications/ipc/en/guide/guide_ipc.pdf

When compared to 2012, data from 2013 indicate an increase in the number of applications closed post examination in

all field, this may be attributed to rise in the examinations’ quality.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

A B C D E F G H

159

50

161

0 10 34 101

47

490

208

606

14 65 122

223 283

828

213

984

11 50 98

405

315

952

218

1460

5 56

112

462 393

Applications Closed Prior to Examination 2012 Applications Closed Prior to Examination 2013

Applications closed Post to Examination 2012 Applications closed Post to Examination 2013

32

Chart 13. Patent Applications Actively Abandoned by the Applicant in 2011-2013

There has been an increase in the number of applications that are being abandoned prior to start of examination. This

may be attributed to the starting of publishing applications after 18 months from priority date, following amendment

no. 9 of the Patent law that came into force in 2012.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

57

31

17

92

77

59

140

33 31

2011 2012 2013

Prior to Examiner's Comments

Following First Office Action from the Examiner

Following Multiple Office Actions from the Examiner

33


b. Acceleration of examinations

Chart 14. Use of Section 17(c) to the Patents Law in 2006-2013 (by fields)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

30 55

117 118

273

113 111 103

13 47

127 152

337

198 170 186

104 106

314 321

883

514 517 487

Biotechnology Chemistry Mechanics, Electronics, IT, Medical Devices

34

Chart 15. Received Applications via Section 17(c) to the Patents Law vs.

All Received Applications in 2006-2013

There has been a decrease in the rate of applicants’ use of examinations in accordance with Article 17(c) of the Patent

law, which enables allowance with no further examination at the basis of a grant of a foreign Patent. One reason for

this is that the Israeli patent examination is in many cases faster than the corresponding applications on which 17c

examination can be based on. Therefore, when applications are being filed according to Article 17(c), in many cases

the applications’ examination in Israel has already begun, hence the ILPO has enough evidence available to justify the

implementation of Article 17(d) and to deny the use of Article 17(c).

5

10

26

31 32

26

24

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

35


Chart 16. Status of Accelerated Examination Applications according to Regulation 35 to the Patents

Regulations in 2008-2013

There has been a steady increase in filing requests for accelerated examination. It should be noted that in most cases

the request for accelerated examination is required by the applicant in order to decide on the feasibility of filing the

application in other countries. The increase in accelerated examination requests indicates the trust of the applicants in

the ILPO’s ability to perform an examination in accordance with International standards, which constitute an important

asset when deciding how to proceed with their application globally.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

56 57 54

103

115

130

20

7 3 5

1 1

30 34

15

4 6 8

Accelerated Examination

Abandonment of Application Following Accelerated Examination

Allowance or Grnted Patent Following Accelarated Examination

36

Chart 17. Amount of Patent Applications in the Status of “Green Application” for Accelerated

Examination in 2010-2013

In 2013, in addition to applications filed in the fields of alternative energy and water conservation, applications were

also filed in the field of advanced Agriculture that reduces the use of fertilizers. It should be noted that although the

volume of applications that may benefit from accelerated examination according to this classification is larger than the

above numbers, the rate of requests for accelerated examination remains relatively low and continues to decline.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2010 2011 2012 2013

16

38

21

18

6 4

1 3

1 1

Approved as "Green Application" Rejected "Green Application" Patent Granted for status

37


Chart 18. Divisional Applications in 2011-2013 (by classifications)

0

50

100

150

200

250

197 192 183

245

218 215 197

232

192

2011 2012 2013


38

Chart 19. Divisional Applications in 2011-2013 (by fields)

A Human Necessities



D Textiles; Paper



G Physics

H Electricity

Classification of fields taken from the WIPO websitehttp://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/classifications/ipc/en/guide/guide_ipc.pdf

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

A B C D E F G H

170

32

261

0 8 6

50 44

216

34

315

3 2 11

49 48

170

26

301

1 2 18

41 62

2011 2012 2013

39


Chart 20. Patent of Addition Applications in 2011-2013 (by classifications)

0

1

2

3

4

5

3

2

0

5

2

0

4

0

2

2011 2012 2013

Mechanics, Electronics, IT, Medical Devices Chemistry

Biotechnology

40

c. Legal proceedings in the Patent department

Chart 21. Amount of Oppositions vs. the Amount of Patent Applications Granted in 2003-2013

Chart 22. Amount of Oppositions Filed in 2003-2013 (by classifications)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

37 32 26 46 40 27 21 23 55 24 32

1,830

2,385 2,117

3,091

2,105 2,115 1,886

4,717

3,206 3,368

3,887

Oppositions Granted Applications

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1 2 2

1 1 0 0 0

7

1 0

5

11

14

18

21

16

9 11

23

11

31

19

10

27

18

11 12 12

25

12

16


41


Table 7. Pending Legal Proceedings in the ILPO by the end of 2013

OppositionsPatent Cancellation

Requests

Stayed

Proceedings

Proceedings pending at

the end of 2013149 7 0

Status of Patent Cancellation Requests handled during 2013

1 proceeding ended with a reasoned decision

4 proceedings ended at the request of the proceeding’s initiator/ joint request

1 proceedings ended at the request of the Patent owner

Table 8. Status of Oppositions to Patent Applications during 2013

Newly

submitted

proceedings

Oppositions

removed

by the

Opponent

Abandonment

during the

opposition of

the Patent

Application by

the Applicant

Opposition

accepted by

Commissioner’s

Decision

Opposition

rejected by

Commissioner’s

Decision

No. of

Oppositions32 27 14 2 2

Average

Proceedings

Period in

Months

36 14 53 44

42

Other Legal Proceedings

In 2013, 5 requests for Patent Cancellation were submitted to the ILPO – 2 requests regarding Patents in the field

of Biotechnology, and 3 requests in the fields of Mechanics and Electronics.

In addition, in 2013:

• 21 unilateral proceedings were heard

• 9 new Patent Term Extension applications were filed and 4 were granted

• 41 patent reinstatement requests were filed

Furthermore, by the end of 2013, 8 applications were pending before the Compensation and Royalties

Committee, 4 of which were filed in 2013.

All the decisions, including numerous interim decisions handed down throughout 2013, are available for public

viewing in Hebrew on the ILPO website:

http://index.justice.gov.il/Units/RashamHaptentim/legalinfo/Pages/Rasham_Decision.aspx

43


d. Administrative decisions Issued by the PCT department

Table 9. Administrative Decisions Issued at the PCT department in 2013

Administrative

Decisions in 2013

Accepted Refused Objections

Requests of Extended Date of

Entry to the National phase –

by Article 48D(c) to the Patent

Law

37 31 6* 1

Requests for Restoration of

Priority Right of International

Application - by regulation

7(b) of the Israel Patent

Regulations

14 10 4

Request of Extended Date of

Filing Patent Application in

Israel according to the Paris

Convention – by Article 164(a)

(1) of the Patent Law

1 - 1

Request of Extended Date of

Priority Right according to the

Paris Convention – by Article

164(a)(2) of the Patent Law

1 1

*One request was received after submitting supplementary affidavits.

44

e. Israel’s International Profile in the field of Patents

Chart 23. Total Patent Applications Filed in 2012 – by Office of Origin (Israel ranked 24th)

The above figures were taken from the database of WIPO. (Data updated to January 2014 and relate to the end of 2012)

652,

777

542,

815

344,

978

342,

796

188,

915

148,

560

61,3

40

44,2

11

43,9

55

35,2

42

30,1

16

26,3

58

23,2

35

16,6

32

15,3

14

13,3

43

12,9

88

9,68

5

9,31

0

8,38

1

7,44

4

7,09

9

6,94

0

6,79

2

6,74

6

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

' '

45


Chart 24. Total Patent Granted in 2012 – by Office of Origin (Israel ranked 21st)


274,

791

253,

155

217,

105

113,

467

65,6

65

32,8

80

21,8

19

17,7

24

12,9

13

12,3

58

11,3

32

6,86

4

6,55

0

6,20

5

6,15

2

5,63

3

5,62

5

5,03

5

4,32

8

3,40

5

3,38

6

2,83

0

2,72

0

2,48

4

2,46

0

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

'

46

Chart 25. Total Patents in Force in 2012 (Israel ranked 24th)


2,23

9,23

1

1,69

4,43

5

875,

385

738,

312

549,

521

490,

941

459,

447

181,

515

148,

020

144,

363

112,

339

112,

176

96,9

62

96,5

83

68,0

00

46,8

54

42,9

91

42,8

38

41,2

42

36,1

58

35,6

16

27,2

22

25,2

75

23,5

97

21,4

47

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

47


Chart 26. Rate of Patent Applications in 2012 by Fields: Israel vs. the Rest of the World


Chart 26 shows that the fields of Pharmaceutical, Medical Technology and IT generate a great amount of technological

activity in Israel, when compared to other fields in other countries.

3 2 2

3

0

7

2

1 2

4

2

1

15

7

10

16

1 1 1

1 1 0

2 2 1 2

1 0

2

1 1 1 2

1 2

7

4

3

5

1

8

1

4

3

5

1 2

4

3 2

4

2 2 3

2

2

3 3 3 2

3

2 3

4

2 3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1 - E

lect

rical

mac

hine

ry, a

ppar

atus

, ene

rgy

2 - A

udio

-visu

al te

chno

logy

3

- Tel

ecom

mun

icat

ions

4

- Dig

ital c

omm

unic

atio

n 5

- Bas

ic c

omm

unic

atio

n pr

oces

ses

6 - C

ompu

ter t

echn

olog

y 7

- IT

met

hods

for m

anag

emen

t 8

- Sem

icon

duct

ors

9 - O

ptic

s 10

- M

easu

rem

ent

11 -

Anal

ysis

of b

iolo

gica

l mat

eria

ls 12

- Co

ntro

l 13

- M

edic

al te

chno

logy

14

- O

rgan

ic fi

ne c

hem

istry

15

- Bi

otec

hnol

ogy

16 -

Phar

mac

eutic

als

17 -

Mac

rom

olec

ular

chem

istry

, pol

ymer

s 18

- Fo

od ch

emist

ry

19 -

Basic

mat

eria

ls ch

emist

ry

20 -

Mat

eria

ls, m

etal

lurg

y 21

- Su

rfac

e te

chno

logy

, coa

ting

22 -

Mic

ro-s

truc

tura

l and

nan

o-te

chno

logy

23

- Ch

emic

al e

ngin

eerin

g 24

- En

viro

nmen

tal t

echn

olog

y 25

- Ha

ndlin

g 26

- M

achi

ne to

ols

27 -

Engi

nes,

pum

ps, t

urbi

nes

28 -

Text

ile a

nd p

aper

mac

hine

s 29

- O

ther

spec

ial m

achi

nes

30 -

Ther

mal

pro

cess

es a

nd a

ppar

atus

31

- M

echa

nica

l ele

men

ts

32 -

Tran

spor

t 33

- Fu

rnitu

re, g

ames

34

- O

ther

cons

umer

goo

ds

35 -

Civi

l eng

inee

ring

Israel World

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

48

Chart 27. Patent Applications per US $ 1.0 Billion GNP in 2012 (Israel ranked 29th)


10,5

84

7,16

0

4,98

0

2,59

6

2,57

5

2,09

0

1,98

8

1,72

2

1,66

7

1,41

4

1,41

0

1,34

8

1,33

9

1,25

1

1,24

8

1,21

3

972

966

854

829

799

764

760

730

684

680

656

628

611

606

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

49


f. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of PCT

Chart 28. PCT Application Filed in the Israeli Receiving office in 1996-2013

The figure regarding PCT applications by state of origin in 2013 is taken from the ILPO data. The other figures were taken from the

database of WIPO.

In 2013 the amount of PCT applications filed by Israeli applicants remained similar to previous years. However, 2013

witnessed an increase in PCT applications filed by Israeli applicants in the ILPO. Additional Israeli applications were

filed at the International Bureau of WIPO in Geneva. This increase may be derived from improvements in the services

provided by the PCT Department, which in 2013 began augment its electronic filing capabilities in order to facilitate the

Israeli applicants and provide them with advanced services at an international level.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

197

449 636

710

874

1,222 1,065 1,124 1,191

1,401 1,513

1,635 1,704

1,238 1,098 1,062

967

1,199

203

445

672 729

924

1,248 1,199 1,161

1,229

1,456 1,584

1,746 1,882

1,555 1,488 1,452 1,377

PCT Applications via Israeli Receiving Office PCT Applications by Country Of Origin - Israel

50

Chart 29. PCT Applications by Method of Filing in 2011-2013 (by percentage)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2011 2012 2013

7 7 4

85

35

5 8

58

91

Paper Filing Paper Filing + PCT Easy Electronic Filing

51


Chart 30. PCT Applications in 2012 – by Receiving Office (Israel ranked 17th)


51,9

96

42,7

87

32,4

27

19,9

24

11,8

69

9,77

5

4,12

9

3,26

6

2,13

5

1,71

3

1,60

7

1,42

4

1,35

6

1,24

9

1,12

9

1,02

0

967

858

644

565

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

52

Chart 31. PCT Applications in 2012 – by Country of Origin (Israel ranked 17th)


51,6

40

43,6

60

18,7

64

18,6

17

11,8

48

7,85

1

4,89

5

4,19

2

4,07

1

3,58

7

2,86

3

2,75

8

2,32

6

1,70

7

1,70

0

1,42

1

1,37

6

1,32

0

1,31

3

1,22

6

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

53


Chart 32. Timeliness in Transmitting PCT Applications to the International bureau in 2012

(Israel ranked 2nd)

The chart taken from WIPO Economic and Statistic Series, 2013 PCT Yearly Rearview – The International Patent System

Graph 32 indicates that almost all of the PCT applications were transmitted to the International Bureau within four

weeks from the date of the application. Israel is ranked 2nd in the world in terms of speed of service given to its

applicants. It should be noted that delays in 0.7% of the requests were caused due to security clearance reasons and

the required treatment followed.

54

Chart 33. Rate of PCT Applications in 2012 by fields: Israel vs. the Rest of the World


Like the figures shown in Chart 26, it is evident that in PCT as well as in Patent applications, the Israeli applicants lead

in the fields of Pharmaceuticals, Medical Technologies and IT.

4

1 3

8

1

2

5

2 2

19

6

9

1 2 1

0 0

3 2

1 2

1 2 2 3

2

8

4 3

7

1

7

2 4

3 4

1 1

6

3 3 4

2 1

3 2 2

2

1 2 2 3

1 3

2 3

4

2 2 3

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 - E

lect

rical

mac

hine

ry, a

ppar

atus

, ene

rgy

2 - A

udio

-visu

al te

chno

logy

3

- Tel

ecom

mun

icat

ions

4

- Dig

ital c

omm

unic

atio

n 5

- Bas

ic c

omm

unic

atio

n pr

oces

ses

6 - C

ompu

ter t

echn

olog

y 7

- IT

met

hods

for m

anag

emen

t 8

- Sem

icon

duct

ors

9 - O

ptic

s 10

- M

easu

rem

ent

11 -

Anal

ysis

of b

iolo

gica

l mat

eria

ls 12

- Co

ntro

l 13

- M

edic

al te

chno

logy

14

- O

rgan

ic fi

ne c

hem

istry

15

- Bi

otec

hnol

ogy

16 -

Phar

mac

eutic

als

17 -

Mac

rom

olec

ular

chem

istry

, pol

ymer

s 18

- Fo

od ch

emist

ry

19 -

Basic

mat

eria

ls ch

emist

ry

20 -

Mat

eria

ls, m

etal

lurg

y 21

- Su

rfac

e te

chno

logy

, coa

ting

22 -

Mic

ro-s

truc

tura

l and

nan

o-te

chno

logy

23

- Ch

emic

al e

ngin

eerin

g 24

- En

viro

nmen

tal t

echn

olog

y 25

- Ha

ndlin

g 26

- M

achi

ne to

ols

27 -

Engi

nes,

pum

ps, t

urbi

nes

28 -

Text

ile a

nd p

aper

mac

hine

s 29

- O

ther

spec

ial m

achi

nes

30 -

Ther

mal

pro

cess

es a

nd a

ppar

atus

31

- M

echa

nica

l ele

men

ts

32 -

Tran

spor

t 33

- Fu

rnitu

re, g

ames

34

- O

ther

cons

umer

goo

ds

35 -

Civi

l eng

inee

ring

Israel World

Designs Department

56



Chart 34. Design Applications vs. Registered Designs in 2003-2013

Chart 34 indicates that in 2013 there has been a decrease of 13% in the rate of design applications’ filings in Israel. The

use of the design registration system in Israel is low in comparison to the overall design activity in the country.

Despite reduction in the number of examiners in the department, in 2013 there was a certain increase in the amount of

completion of design applications’ examinations that were registered as designs.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1,369 1,443

1,677 1,665 1,724

1,775 1,755

1,622

1,511 1,546

1,353

617

907

1,026

1,281 1,299

1,080 1,107

848 861

636 658

Design Applications Registered Designs

57

Table 10. Designs Applications Filed and Registered at the ILPO in 2013 – by Countries

Country Number of Applications Registered Designs

Australia 1 1

Belgium 1 0

Brazil 104 48

Canada 3 1

Cyprus 2 0

Denmark 1 0

Finland 3 1

France 20 14

Germany 44 12

Greece 1 0

Hong Kong 1 0

Hungary 0 1

India 1 0

Israel 861 441

Italy 31 15

Japan 8 9

Lichtenstein 0 1

Luxemburg 4 1

Mexico 0 2

Netherlands 11 1

Norway 1 0

Panama 1 0

People’s Republic of China

(PRC)5 5

Portugal 0 1

58


Singapore 6 0

Spain 7 2

Sweden 36 0

Switzerland 23 18

Republic of Korea (ROK) 27 2

South Africa 0 1

Thailand 0 1

The Bahamas 2 1

Turkey 0 5

United Arab Emirates (UAE) 1 0

United Kingdom 18 5

United States 130 69

Vietnam 1 0

Domestic Applications: 861

Foreign Applications: 494

Total Applications: 1,355

Domestic Registered Designs: 441

Foreign Registered Designs: 217

Total Registered Designs: 658

59

Table 11. Design Applications Filed at the ILPO in 2013 – by Classifications

Classification Foreign Applications Domestic Applications

Registered Filed Registered Filed

Unclassified yet 0 87 0 208

1: Foodstuffs 3 0 1 6

2: Articles of clothing and

haberdashery24 59 12 67

3: Travel goods, cases, parasols and

personal belongings, not elsewhere

specified

2 3 12 25

4: Brushware 12 18 2 1

5: Textile piecegoods, artificial and

natural sheet material0 1 2 1

6: Furnishing 2 5 39 61

7: Household goods, not elsewhere

specified16 20 12 33

23: Tools and hardware 9 13 23 17

9: Packages and containers for the

transport or handling of goods53 65 37 59

10: Clocks and watches and other

measuring instruments, checking and

signaling instruments

0 2 3 10

11: Articles of adornment 39 56 18 37

12 : Means of transport or hoisting 5 62 29 31

13: Equipment for production,

distribution or transformation of

electricity

2 10 6 3

14: Recording, communication or

information retrieval equipment4 26 10 7

60


15: Machines, not elsewhere specified 3 3 2 8

16: Photographic, cinematographic and

optical apparatus0 3 0 1

17: Musical instruments 0 0 0 3

18: Printing and office machinery 8 0 0 7

19 : Stationery and office equipment,

artists and teaching materials1 0 24 13

20: Sales and advertising equipment,

signs7 1 6 7

21: Games, toys, tents and sports

goods5 3 29 17

22: Arms, pyrotechnic articles, articles

for hunting, fishing and pest killing0 1 5 6

23: Fluid distribution equipment,

sanitary, heating, ventilation and air-

conditioning equipment, solid fuel

21 25 20 12

24: Medical and laboratory equipment 6 17 12 36

25: Building units and construction

elements3 1 141 147

26: Lighting apparatus 5 2 15 16

27: Tobacco and smokers supplies 2 4 2 2

28: Pharmaceutical and cosmetic

products, toilet articles and apparatus0 6 4 18

29: Devices and equipment against fire

hazards, for accident prevention and for

rescue

0 0 3 2

30 : Articles for the care and handling

of animals0 0 0 0

31: Machines and appliances for

preparing food or drink, not elsewhere

specified

0 1 0 0

*Classification according to the Third Addition to the Designs Regulation

61

Classification 25, “Building units and construction elements”, occupies a large share of the applications filed by Israeli

applicants, while it is marginal among foreign applicants. Most of these applications relate to building profiles. When

compared to 2012, it is visible that in 2013 the amount of such applications dropped, along with the decrease in the

percentage of Israeli applications and the rate increase in the number of foreign applications.

62

Chart 35. Design Applications Filed in 2013 – by Classification

Unclassified yet

Classification 1

Classification 2

Classification 3

Classification 4

Classification 5

Classification 6

Classification 7

8Classification

Classification 9

Classification 10 11 Classification

12Classification 13Classification

14Classification

15Classification


18 Classification 19 Classification

20Classification

21Classification

22Classification

23:Classification

24Classification

25Classification

26Classification

27Classification


31:Classification

63


Chart 36. Registered Designs in 2013 – by Classifications

Classification 2

Classification 3 Classification 4

Classification 5

Classification 6

Classification 7

Classification 8

Classification 9

Classification 10

Classification 11

Classification 12

Classification 13

Classification 14 Classification 15

Classification18

Classification19

Classification20

Classification21

Classification22

Classification23

Classification24

Classification25

Classification26

Classification27 Classification28

Classification29

64

Chart 37. Average Pendency for Design First Examination in 2008-20013 (months)

The apparent increase in pendency for first examination is attributed to a reduction in the number of qualified employees

in the department. During 2013, two cadets started their training of design examination, which will probably assist in

reducing the examinations time in 2014.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

4 3

6 6

12 12

65


b. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of Designs

Chart 38. Design Applications in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 25th)

*OHIM – Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market

The above figures were taken from the database of WIPO. (Data updated to January 2014 and relate to the

end of 2012).

63,1

35

32,7

99

32,3

91

24,3

21

9,52

6

8,54

5

6,56

3

6,54

9

6,41

4

5,36

2

4,91

6

4,64

0

4,33

9

4,13

7

3,48

1

2,85

6

2,55

2

2,42

8

2,36

1

2,16

0

2,08

2

1,81

2

1,67

7

1,57

4

1,54

9 0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

OHIM

66

Chart 39. Registered Designs in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 31st)

The above figures were taken from the database of WIPO. (Data updated to January 2014 and relate to the end of 2012).

63,1

35

32,7

99

32,3

91

24,3

21

9,52

6

8,54

5

6,56

3

6,54

9

6,41

4

5,36

2

4,91

6

4,64

0

4,33

9

4,13

7

3,48

1

2,85

6

2,55

2

2,42

8

2,36

1

2,16

0

2,08

2

1,81

2

1,67

7

1,57

4

1,54

9

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

OHIM

Trademarks Department

68



Chart 40. Trademarks Applications and Registered Trademarks in 2003-2013

In September 2010, Israel joined the Madrid Protocol and switched from a one class system (one application per one

class) to a multi-classes system (one application per number of classes). This change explains some of the fluctuations

in this chart.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

7,55

4

4,94

6

4,50

7

4,65

0

463

3,85

8

4,

226 4,

930

7,33

5 7,96

6

8,96

7

10,2

54

10,5

78

10,6

08

8,36

6

8,01

7 8,80

4

8,73

3 9,58

0

6,96

0

6,60

9

5,71

3

5,66

1

7,62

1

9,38

9

8,23

9 9,12

1

11,2

01

4,93

7

6,20

5

National Applications International Applications Total Applications

Registered Trademarks

69

Chart 41. Applications and New Classes Filed and Registered Trademarks and Classes in 2003-2013

This chart demonstrates the dramatic increase in the number of classes filed for registration following the joining of

Israel to the Madrid Protocol in September 2010.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

7,33

5

7,96

6 8,96

7 10,2

54

10,5

78

10,6

08

8,36

6

8,01

7 8,80

4

8,73

3 9,58

0

7,33

5

7,96

6 8,96

7 10,2

54

10,5

78

10,6

08

8,36

6 9,94

2

15,5

42

16,8

84 18,4

09

6,96

0

6,60

9

5,71

3

5,66

1

7,62

1

9,38

9

8,23

9 9,12

1

11,2

01

4,93

7 6,20

5

6,96

0

6,60

9

5,71

3

5,66

1

7,62

1

9,38

9

8,23

9 9,13

0

12,3

12

8,20

7

10,9

12

New Applications Classes New Applications Registered Trademarks Classes Registered Trademarks

70


Table 12. Trademarks Applications filed in 2013 – by Countries

CountryNumber of Domestic

Applications

Number of International

Applications

Argentina 9 0

Armenia 0 1

Australia 11 49

Austria 2 69

Barbados 1 1

Belarus 0 17

Belgium 3 80

Bermuda 4 0

Brazil 29 0

British Virgin Islands 12 0

Bulgaria 1 29

Canada 33 7

Cayman Islands 15 1

Channel Islands 3 0

Colombia 1 2

Croatia 0 3

Cuba 1 0

Curacao 0 3

Cyprus 6 45

Czech Republic 2 29

Denmark 9 44

71

Dominica 0 2

Egypt 1 2

Estonia 0 1

Ethiopia 2 0

Finland 7 36

France 71 419

Germany 122 545

Georgia 0 6

Greece 2 17

Hong Kong 44 0

Hungary 0 7

Iceland 0 7

India 20 0

Indonesia 3 1

Ireland 13 56

Israel 2,244 1

Italy 38 324

Jamaica 1 0

Japan 113 156

Jordan 1 0

Latvia 0 12

Lichtenstein 1 22

Lithuania 0 3

Luxemburg 15 49

Malaysia 0 1

Malta 0 21

Mauritius 0 1

Mexico 22 3

72


Moldova 0 6

Monaco 0 11

Netherlands Antilles 2 0

Netherlands 39 115

New Zealand 0 6

Norway 0 11

Oman 1 0

Palestinian Authority 7 0

Panama 2 4

People’s Republic of China (PRC) 56 393

Peru 1 0

Poland 3 30

Portugal 2 35

Romania 2 14

Russia 4 98

Scotland 4 0

Singapore 12 20

Slovakia 0 9

Slovenia 0 2

Sri Lanka 1 0

Spain 38 151

Sweden 12 71

Switzerland 241 455

Republic of Macedonia 0 1

Republic of Korea (ROK) 42 41

South Africa 8 0

Taiwan 27 0

Thailand 13 1

73

The Bahamas 4 0

The Philippines 0 2

Turkey 18 187

Ukraine 3 48

United Arab Emirates (UAE) 0 1

United Kingdom 96 205

United States 1,134 919

Uzbekistan 1 0

Total Applications: 9,543

Domestic Applications: 4,635

International Applications: 4,908

Within the applications filed in Israel, merely 23% are domestic applications filed by Israeli applicants. About 21% of the

applications originate from the United States.

Most residents of member countries to the Madrid Protocol chose the international track and filed their applications

via the Madrid system, excluding applications originated from the United States, filed in the national route (55%) and

international route (45%).

74


Table 13. Leading Applicants in filing Trademarks Applications in 2013

Company nameNational

applications

International

applicationsTotal

1. Novartis AG 164 25 189

2. Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH 53 6 59

3. Apple Inc. 5 42 47

4. L’OREAL 3 40 43

5. Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. 42 0 42

6. Avon Products, Inc. 0 41 41

7. Gilead Sciences Limited 3 32 35

8. Société des Produits Nestlé S.A. 15 18 33

9. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. 33 0 33

10. Abercrombie & Fitch Europe SA 0 32 32

11. Start Up Nation Holdings Israel Ltd. 32 0 32

12. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. 6 25 31

13. Henkel AG & Co. KGaA 2 28 30

14. The Procter & Gamble Company 28 0 28

15. Unilever PLC 25 2 27

16. Keshet Broadcasting Ltd. 25 0 25

17. Magpul Industries Corp. 24 0 24

18. Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 0 24 24

19. Johnson & Johnson 24 0 24

20. Ironsource Israel (2011) Ltd. 23 0 23

75

Table 14. Leading Applicants in Registration of Trademarks in 2013

Company nameNational

applications

International

applicationsTotal

1. Abercrombie & Fitch Europe SA 3 41 44

2. Johnson & Johnson 34 0 34

3. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. 34 0 34

4. Jewish National Fund 33 0 33

5. Novartis AG 18 12 30

6. Sanofi 9 20 29

7. Apple Inc. 1 27 28

8. Société des Produits Nestlé S.A. 0 23 23

9. Philip Morris Products S.A. 6 16 22

10. Super-Pharm (Israel) Ltd. 22 0 22

11. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. 12 9 21

12. Gilead Sciences Limited 1 20 21

13. Celgene Corporation 14 7 21

14. AUDI AG 15 5 20

15. CJ 4DPLEX Co., Ltd. 20 0 20

16. Nissan Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading

as Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.)19 0 19

17. The Association for public health (Ha’aguda

Lebriut Hazibur)18 0 18

18. Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd 0 18 18

19. Avon Products, Inc. 1 16 17

20. The Procter & Gamble Company 17 0 17

76


Chart 42. Trademarks Application in 2013 – by Classes

About 25% of the applications were filed for services while 75% of the applications were filed for goods. The

leading goods categories were cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, electrical, science, electricity and computer instruments,

proceedings of clothing and footwear, food and beverages. The leading services categories were commercial, education

and entertainment and scientific and technological services.

Class 1 - Chemicals

Class 2 - Paints

Class 3 - Cleaning Products, Cosmetics

Class 4 - Industrial Oils

Class 5 - Pharmaceutical and veterinary preparations

Class 6 - Common Metals Class 7 - Machinery

Class 8 - Hand Tools

Class 9 - Science, Electricity and Computer Instruments

Class 10 - Medical Devices

Class 11 - Light, Cooking, Heating Devices

Class 12 - Vehicles

Class 13 - Weapons

Class 14 - Precious Metals

Class 15 - Music Instruments

Class 16 - Paper and Stationery

Class 17 - Sealing and Insulating Materials

Class 18 - Bags, Leather and Imitations of

Leather

Class 19 - Non-Metallic Building Materials

Class 20 - Furniture

Class 21 - Kitchenware, Clearing Materials, Glass

Class 22 - Ropes Raw Textile Materials

Class 23 - Yarns and Threads

Class 24 - Fabrics

Class 25 - Clothing and Footwear

Class 26 - Lace, Embroidery, Buttons

Class 27 - Carpets,

Rugs

Class 28 - Games, Gymnastics Items

Class 29 - Milk, Fish, Meat, Canned Food

Class 30 - Bakery Goods, Confectionery

Class 31 - Fresh Fruits and Vegetables

Class 32 - Non Alcoholic Beverages

Class 33 - Alcoholic Beverages

Class 34 - Smokers' Articles

Class 35 - Advertising, Commerce

Class 36 - Insurance and Finance

Class 37 - Construction and Repair

Class 38 - Communication

Class 39 - Transportation and Warehousing

Class 40- Treatment of Materials

Class 41 - Education and Entertainment

Class 42 - Scientific and Technological Services

Class 43 - Provision of Food and Drink

Class 44 - Medical Services Class 45 - Personal and Social Services

77

Chart 43. Registered Trademarks in 2013 – by Classes

Class 1 - Chemicals

Class 2 - Paints Class 3 - Cleaning Products, Cosmetics

Class 4 - Industrial Oils

Class 5 - Pharmaceutical and veterinary preparations

Class 6 - Common Metals Class 7 - Machinery

Class 8 - Hand Tools

Class 9 - Science, Electricity and Computer Instruments

Class 10 - Medical Devices

Class 11 - Light, Cooking, Heating Devices

Class 12 - Vehicles Class 13 - Weapons

Class 14 - Precious Metals

Class 15 - Music Instruments

Class 16 - Paper and Stationery

Class 17 - Sealing and Insulating Materials

Class 18 - Bags, Leather and Imitations of

Leather

Class 19 - Non-Metallic Building Materials

Class 20 - Furniture

Class 21 - Kitchenware, Clearing Materials, Glass

Class 22 - Ropes Raw Textile Materials

Class 23 - Yarns and Threads

Class 24 - Fabrics

Class 25 - Clothing and

Footwear

Class 26 - Lace, Embroidery, Buttons

Class 27 - Carpets, Rugs

Class 28 - Games, Gymnastics Items

Class 29 - Milk, Fish, Meat, Canned Food

Class 30 - Bakery Goods, Confectionery

Class 31 - Fresh Fruits and Vegetables

Class 32 - Non Alcoholic

Beverages

Class 33 - Alcoholic Beverages

Class 34 - Smokers' Articles

Class 35 - Advertising, Commerce

Class 36 - Insurance and Finance

Class 37 - Construction and Repair

Class 38 - Communication

Class 39 - Transportation and Warehousing

Class 40- Treatment of Materials

Class 41 - Education and Entertainment Class 42 - Scientific and

Technological Services

Class 43 - Provision of Food and Drink

Class 44 - Medical Services

Class 45 - Personal and Social Services

78

Chart 44. National and International Applications closed in 2013

In 2013, 913 domestic applications and 411 international applications were closed, of which 168 applications were

revalidated.

In the absence of the applicant’s response, domestic applications are being entirely closed, while international

applications remain open and only the goods or services which received the refusals are being closed.

37 applications were closed after the decision of the Registrar or the adjudicator of intellectual property, or following

an unilaterally opposition proceeding.

30 international applications were closed following the International Office decision, due to an applicant’s request

to close an application filed at the International Office, or following closing the base application during five years of

dependency.

1 domestic application was closed after the Department refused to accept it for registration and the applicant decided

not to appeal for a refusal.

In addition, 4,271 registered Trademarks were closed due to non-payment of the fee.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900 834

42 36 0 1

375

5 1 30

0

Domestc Applications International Applications

Applicant's Lack of Response

Request of the Applicant

Decision of the Register

Closing decision from WIPO

Decision of the Department

79


Chart 45. Application Examined in First and Second Examinations and Pendency (in months) for these

Examinations in 2010-2013

Although the number of trademark examiners in the Department has marginally grown, great effort was made to

increase the amount of classes’ examinations. Despite that, the pendency for examination has ascended in light of the

dramatic increase in the number of classes filed.

12,584 11,798

9,258

17,281

365 229 336 388

7,431 6,897

7,514

10,299

74 81 68 47 0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

2010 2011 2012 2013

First Examinations Waiting time for First Examinations (months)

Second Examinations Waiting time for Second Examinations (months)

80

Chart 46. Trademarks in Force Including Classes in Israel in 2003-2013

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

103,

971

110,

577

116,

284

121,

944

129,

562

138,

949

146,

930

155,

660

166,

179

170,

901

176,

978

104,

190

110,

887

116,

615

122,

285

129,

970

139,

368

147,

357

156,

096

167,

683

176,

048

187,

454

Trademarks in force Classes

81


b. Legal proceedings in the Trademarks Department

Table 15. Legal Proceedings regarding Trademarks in 2013

Type of Proceeding Opened in 2013 Closed in 2013Total open

proceedings in 2013

Concurring Applications 20 12 20

Oppositions 71 91 98

Unilateral Proceedings 20 39 14

Requests for

Cancellation, Deletion

or Correction of the

Registrar

28 34 40

82


c. Israel’s International Profile in the Field of TrademarksChart 47. Total Trademarks Registered in 2012 – by Countries (Israel ranked 46th)

The above figures were taken from the database of WIPO. (Data updated to January 2014 and relate to the end of 2012). The figure

Regarding Israel is taken from the ILPO database.

995,

124

180,

966

96,2

46

95,5

01

82,1

70

75,9

38

64,9

84

64,2

95

55,2

30

55,1

91

50,1

23

42,6

07

5,63

1

5,38

5

5,11

9

5,11

7

4,93

7

4,91

9

-100,000

100,000

300,000

500,000

700,000

900,000

1,100,000

OHIM

83




995,

124

180,

966

96,2

46

95,5

01

82,1

70

75,9

38

64,9

84

64,2

95

55,2

30

55,1

91

50,1

23

42,6

07

5,63

1

5,38

5

5,11

9

5,11

7

4,93

7

4,91

9

-100,000

100,000

300,000

500,000

700,000

900,000

1,100,000

OHIM

84


Chart. 49. Designation of International Application Filed through the Madrid Protocol in 2012 – by

countries (Israel ranked 19th)



20,1

20

16,8

89

16,6

34

16,4

11

13,4

64

12,4

93

10,7

53

10,0

90

9,65

6

9,28

2

8,38

0

7,83

8

6,05

3

6,02

2

5,32

3

5,29

9

4,92

9

4,65

0

4,47

5

4,30

6

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

OHIM

85

Chart 50. Trademarks in Force World Wide in 2012 - by Countries (Israel ranked 30th)



1,79

7,15

3 1,

782,

169

925,

446

852,

632

822,

375

817,

862

784,

834

784,

540

588,

219

523,

131

502,

319

487,

588

443,

151

397,

233

366,

500

333,

310

304,

524

299,

119

298,

247

272,

011

264,

709

255,

734

234,

889

233,

083

214,

246

198,

734

189,

107

183,

226

176,

048

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

Chin

a

USA

Ja

pan

In

dia

Spai

n

epub

lic o

f Kor

ea

Ger

man

y

Mex

ico

Be

nelu

x

Turk

ey

Aust

ralia

Ca

nada

Ru

ssia

U

K

Italy

Po

rtug

al

Sout

h Af

rica

Ho

ng K

ong

Aust

ria

Sing

apor

e

Hung

ary

Co

lom

bia

N

ew Z

eala

nd

Pola

nd

Switz

erla

nd

Chile

N

orw

ay

Cost

a Ri

ca

Isra

el

OHIM

R

86


Freedom of Information Law

The Freedom of Information Law, 5758-1998, states that every citizen or resident of Israel has the right to receive

information about the activity of a public body. The law specifies the types of information that should be available for

public review and the ways to increase accessibility to it. As a rule, the ILPO provides the public with all information as

required under law and in view of the recognized importance of transparency.

The judicial decisions of the Commissioner, his deputy and the adjudicators are published on the ILPO’s website,

distributed to the popular legal databases and to ILPO’s online distribution list. Administrative instructions of the Head

of the ILPO in the form of circulars and public notices are posted at the ILPO’s website for public review and mailed to

the online distribution list.

The Head of the ILPO, by virtue of his authority under Section 3 to the Freedom of Information Law, has appointed a

person in charge of providing information to the public, handling requests for information and the application of the

provisions of said law. The person in charge is acting within said position under the professional guidance of attorney

Michal Tenne, Director of the Public Enquiries Unit and Supervisor of the application of the Freedom of Information

law in the Ministry of Justice.

In 2013 2 requests to receive information, according to the Freedom of Information Law were filed to the person in

charge of providing information at the ILPO.

It should be noted that in order to complete the information given by the ILPO, the legal decisions issued by the

Commissioner, his Deputy and the Legal Judicial, are posted on the ILPO website and various legal databases as

well as are sent to the ILPO’s mailing list. (for subscription kindly refer to http://www.justice.gov.il/MOJHeb/Tfuza).

The Commissioner’s administrative guidelines, such as Commissioner’s Circulars and Public Notices, are posted at the

ILPO’s website and sent to the mailing list.

87

For public enquiries:

Office of the Head of ILPO

1 Agudat Sport Hapoel St., Technology Garden, Building no. 5, Jerusalem 96951

[email protected] Phone: 972-2-565-1702

Person in Charge of Provision of Information to the Public in the Israel Patent Office

Mr. Moshe Cohen

Phone: 972-2-5651702

Officer in Charge of Provision of Information to the Public in the Ministry of Justice

Ms. Michal Tenne, Attorney at Law

Phone: 972-2-646-6321 Fax: 972-2-646-7085 [email protected]

To view decisions and for additional continuous and updated information about the ILPO, please visit our website: http://index.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ILPO/Pages/default.aspx

Annual Report online: http://index.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ILPO/About/Pages/Annualreport.aspx

88


Report Editing: Noa Amit, International Relations Officer, ILPO

Dikla Arinos, International Relations Officer, ILPO

Graphic Design: Graphos Print

Documents

2013 - משרד המשפטיםindex.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ILPO/Main Docs/AnnualReport2013Eng... · In 2013 the Patent Formalities Department’s capabilities were ... during 2013