About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Legislative Implementation of Flexibilities - Uruguay

Title:Articles 23, 31 and 32 of the Law No. 17.164 Regulating Rights and Obligations Relating to Patents, Utility Models and Industrial Designs No. 1.827*R of 02/09/1999
Field of IP:Patents
Type of flexibility:Substantive examination
Summary table:PDF

Provisions of Law

23. Where the preliminary formal examination of a patent application shows that it does not meet the requirements prescribed in the preceding Article, but that it identifies the applicant, contains a description of the subject matter and the claims, the applicant shall be given the period laid down in the regulations but not exceeding 90 days to meet the requirements. The application shall retain the date of filing if the requirements are met within this time limit; if they are not, the application is deemed to be have been abandoned.

31. Any interested party may put forward comments based on the patent application within the period prescribed in the regulations, as of the date of publication. The submission of comments shall not suspend the application process and the person making the comments shall not become a party to the procedure.

32. The purpose of the substantive examination of applications shall be to determine whether the proposed invention meets the requirements and criteria for patentability laid down in this Law.

For this purpose, it shall be permissible:

(a) to request the applicant to furnish copies of the anticipation search, the substantive examinations and other documentation available to him;

(b) to seek the advice of bodies which carry out scientific and technological activities;

(c) to utilize patent documents, search and examination reports or similar documents prepared by other patent offices.

All the comments resulting from the substantive examination shall be contained in a single act, unless there are new or supervenient elements that might affect patentability.

The comments made shall be shown to the applicant within the time limit fixed in the regulations.