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 - Panama

Title:Articles 40, 45-49 and 52 of the Law No. 35 of 10/05/1996 Enacting Provisions on Industrial Property
Field of IP:Patents
Type of flexibility:Substantive examination
Summary table:PDF

Provisions of Law

40. Where the application does not comply with the provisions of the foregoing Article, DIGERPI shall notify the applicant accordingly so that within a period of six months, which shall be renewable for another two months on just grounds, he may divide it into two or more applications, which shall retain the date of the initial application and where appropriate of the recognized priority as the date for each one of them. If, on expiration of the said period, the applicant has not made the division, the application shall be considered abandoned and its consignment to the archives shall be ordered.

45. On receiving the application, DIGERPI shall undertake an examination of the documentation as to form, and may request further information or clarification where necessary, or the rectification of omissions. It shall also examine whether the subject matter of the patent application meets the patentability requirements laid down in this Law, with the exception of the novelty and inventive step requirements. Nevertheless, DIGERPI shall refuse the grant of a patent in a reasoned decision, after having heard the person concerned, when the invention to which the application relates is found to be clearly and overtly lacking in novelty.

Where the applicant fails to comply with the request made to him by DIGERPI to rectify defects in the application within a period of six months, which period shall be renewable for another six months at the request of the applicant, the application shall be considered abandoned and its consignment to the archives shall be ordered. The documents filed shall on no account contain additional claims or claims of greater scope than those of the original application, which would necessitate the filing of a new application.

46. DIGERPI shall reject the application totally or partly if it considers that the subject matter thereof is not patentable or that it has defects that have still not been rectified.

Where the examination by DIGERPI does not reveal defects that would prevent the grant of the patent, or where such defects have been duly rectified, it shall be made known to the applicant that, for the consideration of his application to proceed, he must request the production of a report on the state of the art within the periods laid down in this Law if he has not already done so.

47. On the expiration of 18 months following the filing date of the application, or the date of any priority claimed, if the examination finding referred to in the foregoing Article has been favorable and the applicant has filed the request for a report on the state of the art, DIGERPI shall order the publication of the patent application in BORPI. At any time prior to the expiration of the period referred to, the applicant may, in writing, request publication of his application if he has complied with the provisions of Article 46.

48. Within the 14 months following the filing date, the applicant may request DIGERPI to produce the report on the state of the art, and pay the prescribed fee for the purpose. Where priority has been claimed, the 14 months shall be counted from the priority date.

Where the applicant has to rectify defects as a result of the examination of his application, the period for rectification shall be that laid down in Article 45 of this Law. Once the notification referred to in the final paragraph of the said Article has been made, the applicant shall request the production of the report on the state of the art within the month following the said notification.

Where the applicant fails to comply with the provisions of this Article, his application shall be deemed abandoned.

The production of the report on the state of the art may not be requested with reference to an addition if it has not, either previously or at the same time, been requested for the main patent and for any earlier additions.

49. Once the examination of the application provided for in Article 45 has been completed and the applicant has requested the production of the report on the state of the art, DIGERPI shall proceed to draw up the said report with reference to the subject matter of the patent application within a period not exceeding eight months.

For the production of the report, DIGERPI may avail itself of the services of national and international bodies or counterpart offices.

DIGERPI may accept a report on the state of the art submitted by the applicant that has been drawn up by a national or international body.

That report shall mention the elements of prior art that may be taken into consideration for the assessment of the novelty and inventive step of the subject matter of the application, and it shall be evaluated on the basis of the claims of the application, due account being taken of the description and any drawings filed.

Once the report on the state of the art has been drawn up, DIGERPI shall forward it to the patent applicant and publish it in BORPI.

52. Regardless of the contents of the report on the state of the art and of any comments made by third parties, DIGERPI shall, on the expiration of the period for comments by the applicant, proceed to grant the patent applied for against payment of the corresponding fees.

Where the claims are amended, DIGERPI shall send a copy thereof to third parties who have made comments on the report on the state of the art.

The grant of the patent shall be made without prejudice to the rights of third parties and without any State guarantee of the effectiveness of the patent, of the invention itself or of the usefulness of the subject matter to which it relates.

The applicant shall pay the grant fees within a period of two months. Where that period expires without payment having been made, the application shall be considered abandoned and its consignment to the archives shall be ordered.

https://www3.wipo.int/contact/en/area.jsp?area=development_agenda https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/disclaim.html https://www.wipo.int/en/web/privacy-policy/ https://www.wipo.int/en/web/accessibility/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/sitemap.html https://www3.wipo.int/newsletters/en/ https://www.wipo.int/podcasts/en/ https://www.wipo.int/news/en/