By Jorge Montalvo, NEREO LEGAL
For many years, the prevailing understanding in Mexico regarding patent validity revolved around a “20-year rule.” This rule, seemingly straightforward, provided that a patent’s term would last 20 years from the filing date of the application. At first glance, this guideline appeared reasonable and fair. However, the practical reality of this framework reveals significant drawbacks when delays in processing patent applications curtail the actual period of protection afforded to inventors. This issue has brought to the forefront the importance of compensating patentees for time lost to administrative delays and highlights the need to understand the mechanism of patent extension certificates in Mexico.
Contents
1. The Shortcomings of the 20-Year Rule
2. Delays and Inequities in Patent Processing
3. The Introduction of Supplementary Certificates
4. Learning from the Bayer Corporation Case
5. A Step Toward Fairness: Supreme Court’s Intervention
6. The Importance of Patent Term Extensions in Mexico
7. Practical Steps for Patent Term Extensions in Mexico
8. Looking Ahead: The Future of Patent Protection in Mexico
1. The Shortcomings of the 20-Year Rule
The 20-year rule assumes that an inventor’s protection begins immediately upon filing and lasts for two decades. However, the countdown starts on the filing date, not when the patent is officially granted. Given that the patent approval process often experiences delays, the effective enforcement period can be substantially reduced. This means that an inventor may have only a fraction of the expected time to enjoy the exclusive rights provided by the patent. For those who invest considerable resources and time into developing new technologies, this reduction in protection can be both frustrating and financially damaging.
2. Delays and Inequities in Patent Processing
Historically, patent processing times in Mexico have varied widely. In some cases, approvals are granted in just a few years, but in others, the process can drag on for much longer. The inconsistency has created an environment of uncertainty for inventors, leaving them vulnerable to diminished protection periods. This unpredictability not only feels inherently unfair but also undermines the purpose of patent law—to reward and incentivize innovation.
The lack of enforceable rights during the application process exacerbates these challenges. Until a patent is granted, inventors cannot act against infringers or leverage their patent for opportunities such as participating in government contracts for pharmaceutical supplies. This lack of parity puts Mexican inventors at a disadvantage compared to those in countries like the United States and Canada, where mechanisms exist to mitigate the effects of such delays.
3. The Introduction of Supplementary Certificates
In an effort to address these inequities, Mexico has introduced supplementary patent extension certificates under Article 126 of the Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property (FLPIP). This measure, influenced by commitments under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), seeks to compensate for delays that exceed five years from the filing date to the granting of a patent.
While this initiative represents progress, it has notable limitations. The current formula for calculating compensatory time provides only one extra day of protection for every two days of delay. Critics argue that this formula falls short of adequately compensating for the lost time, leaving inventors without the full benefits they deserve.
4. Learning from the Bayer Corporation Case
A prominent example of the challenges posed by patent delays in Mexico is the case of Bayer Corporation. Bayer filed a patent application for an oncological invention in January 2000. The patent was not granted until six and a half years later, followed by an additional eight-month delay in issuing the patent certificate. In total, more than seven years elapsed from the initial filing to the completion of the process. This significant delay drastically reduced the effective term of Bayer’s patent protection.
Under the provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Bayer should have been entitled to compensatory time to account for these delays. NAFTA mandates a minimum protection period of 17 years from the grant date or 20 years from the filing date, whichever is longer. Despite this, Mexican authorities denied Bayer any compensatory time, citing limitations in domestic law. This case underscores the unfairness of penalizing inventors for delays caused by administrative inefficiencies and highlights the importance of aligning national practices with international obligations.
5. A Step Toward Fairness: Supreme Court’s Intervention
In 2020, the Mexican Supreme Court addressed the issue of patent delays in a landmark decision. The Court ruled that all patents must enjoy a minimum effective protection period of at least 17 years from the grant date, irrespective of administrative delays. This interpretation aligns with Mexico’s international commitments under agreements like NAFTA and reflects the constitutional rights of inventors.
While the Court’s decision is a significant step forward, it does not entirely resolve the challenges faced by patentees in Mexico. Nonetheless, it sets a more equitable framework for ensuring that inventors receive a fair term of protection for their innovations.
6. The Importance of Patent Term Extensions in Mexico
For inventors, every additional year of patent protection holds immense value. Patents grant exclusive rights that enable inventors to recover their investments in research and development, finance future innovations, and maintain a competitive edge in the marketplace. When these rights are curtailed by administrative delays, the consequences can be severe, both financially and strategically. Also check the IP challenges in Mexico.
Countries like the United States and Canada have long recognized the importance of addressing this issue. In the U.S., for instance, the patent term can be extended to account for administrative delays, ensuring that inventors retain the full benefit of their innovations. While Mexico’s introduction of supplementary certificates is a step in the right direction, there remains considerable room for improvement.
7. Practical Steps for Patent Term Extensions in Mexico
Understanding and navigating the complexities of Mexico’s patent system is essential for inventors seeking to protect their innovations. Here are some practical tips:
1. Understand the Legal Framework: Familiarize yourself with Article 126 of FLPIP, which provides for supplementary certificates. Be aware of the limitations of the current compensatory formula and monitor any updates to the law.
2. Track Processing Times: Keep detailed records of how long your patent application takes to progress through the system. If delays exceed five years, you may be eligible for compensatory time under the supplementary certificate provisions.
3. Consult a Legal Expert: Patent law can be intricate, and expert advice is invaluable in ensuring that your rights are fully protected. A qualified attorney can help you navigate the system and advocate for your interests.
4. Advocate for Policy Improvements: Join industry groups or professional organizations to amplify your voice in pushing for a more robust compensatory framework. Collective advocacy can drive meaningful changes in the patent system.
8. Looking Ahead: The Future of Patent Protection in Mexico
The introduction of supplementary certificates and the Supreme Court’s ruling represent progress in addressing the issue of patent delays in Mexico. However, challenges remain. Ensuring that inventors receive adequate protection for their innovations requires ongoing efforts to refine and improve the current system. By staying informed, advocating for change, and leveraging available legal tools, inventors can play an active role in shaping a more equitable future for intellectual property rights in Mexico.
In conclusion, patent protection serves as a cornerstone of innovation, providing the exclusive rights necessary to foster technological progress and economic growth. While Mexico has taken important steps toward addressing administrative delays, more work is needed to ensure that inventors receive the full term of protection they deserve. Through a combination of legal reform, effective advocacy, and proactive engagement with the patent system, inventors can help build a system that truly rewards and incentivizes innovation.
***
Need any help with patent registration in Mexico? Contact NEREO LEGAL now via iPNOTE to start protecting your IP.
The iPNOTE platform features more than 700 IP law firms that cover more than 150 countries, so you can always find the right direct service provider using our flexible filtering system.
Sign up for free, and we’ll help you solve any IP-related problem.