国际专利申请策略

Thanks for meeting with me, Sarah. I'm starting to think about international patent protection for my new device. What's the best approach?

Of course, John. When considering global protection, we typically look at two main routes: the PCT application and direct national filings under the Paris Convention. Each has its pros and cons.

I've heard of PCT, but I'm not entirely clear on how it works. Could you elaborate on the benefits, especially in terms of cost and flexibility?

Certainly. The PCT, or Patent Cooperation Treaty, allows you to file one international application that can then be processed in multiple countries. This delays the significant national filing costs for up to 30 or 31 months, giving you time to assess market potential and secure funding for specific regions.

That delayed cost seems very attractive. What about the Paris Convention? How does that differ, and when would that be a better option?

The Paris Convention route involves directly filing national applications in each country within 12 months of your first filing. This is often preferred if you only need protection in a few specific, definite countries and want those protections granted more quickly, as it bypasses the PCT's international search phase.

So, if I'm not sure which countries yet, PCT offers flexibility. But if I know for certain, say, the US, Europe, and Japan, direct filings might be faster?

Exactly. And even with a PCT, you still eventually enter national phases in your chosen countries, but you have the benefit of the international search report and preliminary examination reports from the PCT phase, which can streamline national prosecution.

That makes a lot more sense now. I think the PCT sounds like a good starting point, given I'm still exploring markets. Can we discuss the initial steps for a PCT application?

Absolutely. The first step would be to prepare a robust patent specification that meets PCT requirements. We can schedule a follow-up to go over the drafting process and filing timeline.