|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
HOME > Resources >
Newsletters |
|
|
| |
|
|
Title |
|
Korea Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (IPTAB) implements the measures to improve the trial quality of patent cancellation petitions.(News Letter No. 586) |
|
|
Author |
|
KH |
|
Post Date |
|
2026-10-16 |
|
|
Read |
|
70 |
|
Attach File |
|
- |
|
1. Korea Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (IPTAB) implements the measures to improve the trial quality of patent cancellation petitions.
- The standard manual for patent cancellation petitioners including petition procedures and exemplary cases is also distributed.
On September 13, 2026, MOIP announced to implement measures to improve the trial quality of patent cancellation petitions and to distribute the standard manual for patent cancellation petitioners, to enhance the thoroughness of patent cancellation petition trials and to make it easier for the public to use the system.
Since the patent cancellation petition system allows anyone to challenge the validity of a patent within a certain period after its registration, it has the advantage of allowing weak or invalid patents to be cleared up easily and quickly.
However, previously, since there were no established guidelines for the cancellation petitioners to refer to when preparing the cancellation petitions, there were cases where the grounds and reasons for cancelling patents were not submitted in detail. In these cases, even if the trial board notifies patentees of an opinion for cancellation, it has been pointed out that the patentees have difficulties in properly responding, such as amending their patent claims by accurately understanding the specific reasons and grounds for the cancellation opinion.
In this regard, IPTAB analyzed past patent cancellation cases to support the petitioners for cancellation to present more specific reasons and grounds for cancellation, and the trial board prepared the improvement measures to more clearly present the reasons for grounds for cancellation decisions to the patentees.
<(1) The trial board will more clearly inform the reasons for patent cancellation decision.>
The trial board more specifically notifies a patentee of a cancellation opinion such that the patentee can clearly understand the reasons for patent cancellation decision and take a necessary response, such as amending a patent claim(s), etc. Since this reflects the indication that if the reasons for cancellation submitted by a petitioner for cancellation are too broad, it may be not appropriate for the trial board to adopt them as they are, the trial board clearly presents the reasons and grounds why the patent cancellation is justified, by distinctly setting them forth by each patent claim.
Additionally, IPTAB plans to enhance consistency in trials and to continue to manage the tiral quality by preparing a standard version of a notice of submission of a cancellation opinion and sharing the educations for judges and the best trial cases.
<(2) The trial board will help in making a patent cancellation petition easier and more accurate.>
Support at the stage of petition for patent cancellation is also strengthened so that a petitioner for cancellation can more easily and accurately prepare the reasons and grounds for cancellation.
To this end, IPTAB distributes the standard manual for patent cancellation petitioners. The manual covers the following topics in an easy-to-understand way: ►the procedure of a petition for patent cancellation and the writing guideline for grounds for cancellation, ►method for comparing claim(s) and prior art in terms of constitution(s), ►method for characterizing a main invention when there are 2 or more prior art, ►method for identifying the differences between a patent technology and prior art(s), and ►method for presenting the motivations and implications to combine prior art, etc. In addition, the manual presents key writing examples and crucial precautions such that a petitioner can effectively convey the purpose and grounds for cancellation petition.
Furthermore, when it is necessary to more clearly identify the grounds for cancellation and the core issues, opinions from a petition for cancellation and a patentee are to be carefully listened by using technical briefings and interviews with judges, etc. and major issues are to be thoroughly reviewed through mutual communication.
2. IPTAB and the major companies in the pharmaceutical and bio technology areas discussed current trial issues, such as patent term extension, AI utilization, etc.
IPTAB under MOIP held a meeting with major companies and agents in the pharmaceutical and bio technology areas, to discus recent industry concerns, such as the patent term extension, AI utilization, etc., and the direction of trial system improvements desired by the field.
In this meeting, the president of IPTAB and the chief judge in the pharmaceutical and bio technology areas attended to discuss ►the direction to amend the recently discussed patent term extension system and the detailed operational measures to ensure the effectiveness in the trial procedures. They also sought ►the measures to utilize AI to enhance the efficiency of trial work and the verification and sanction measures for false or manipulated evidence created with AI.
In addition, they shared opinions on ►the measures to reduce variations in the processing time of trial cases through the efficient management of case assignment and scheduling, ►the improvement of the sufficient communication between the trial board and the parties through oral hearings, etc. and the predictability of trial results, and ►the improvements of trial procedures from the perspective of trial clients.
The president of IPTAB said, “we will actively reflect the vivid voices collected from the field at this meeting into our trial policies and systems…We will continue to make every effort to provide faster and more professional trial services to support the technological innovation and smooth commercialization of the pharmaceutical and bio technology companies.”
3. A ‘K-brand protection conference’ was held for the expansion of the public-private cooperative framework for protecting K-trademarks.
-MOIP and about 30 K-trademark and platform companies opened a dedicated hotline to respond to intellectual property infringement.
MOIP and about 30 K-trademark and major domestic and international platform companies are joining forces to launch the ‘online IP infringement response hotline’ to rapidly respond to intellectual property infringement online.
According to MOIP, the K-brand protection conference was held for the expansion of the public-private cooperative framework to protect K-trademarks.
This event was prepared to further strengthen the cooperation among the government, associations, organizations and companies for K-trademark protection and to create a field-oriented protection ecosystem. About 200 people attended including Yeonwoo JEONG, Vice Minister of MOIP, Sanggon SHIN, President of the Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency (KOIPA), participating associations and organizations of the K-trademark protection public-private joint council, Korea Consumer Agency (KCA), participating institutions in AI appraisal support, etc. The main events included ►the presentation of awards for contributions to K-trademark protection and ►the signing of memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with new partners and organizations, such as Korea Sport Industry Association (KSIA), Korea Animation Industry Association, etc.
Notably, the online IP infringement response hotline is to be opened to promptly respond to domestic online IP infringement. Led by MOIP, Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency (KIPPA) and Korea Consumer Agency (KCA), the trademark owners of about 30 trademarks and major domestic and overseas platform companies will work closely together to build an authentic product sales ecosystem in online marketplaces.
The topic presentation introduced the operational performance of the public-private council for K-trademark protection and the AI-utilizing appraisal support project and shared the achievements of protecting Korean trademarks overseas, such as the blocking of overseas online counterfeit products, the in-depth investigation into the status of unauthorized overseas trademark preemption, the K-brand monitoring service to early notify of overseas applications for similar trademarks, etc. It also introduced the measures to respond to the Korean Wave (Hallyu) piggybacking act in foreign countries and the major changes in the recently revised Chinese Trademark Law to take effect in 2027.
At the event place, the authentic and counterfeit versions of frequently counterfeited items were on display for comparison, and the various side events were also held, such as the experience of AI appraisal support for genuine vs. fake products, the fake K-brand reporting center campaign, the award-winning film of the joint promotional short video contest by the public-private joint council for K-trademark protection, etc.
4. MOIP and Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) held a briefing on core protection strategies for technology and intellectual property that companies need to know (September 8, 2026).
Together with KCCI, MOIP held a briefing on core protection strategies for technology and intellectual property that companies need to know.
The briefing was prepared to strengthen companies’ response capabilities in technology security, intellectual property protection and intellectual property infringement and was attended by about 100 intellectual property and technology security experts and businessmen, including MOIP.
According to National Intelligence Service, the number of overseas leakage cases of industrial technologies totaled 118 between 2021 and June 2026, including 35 cases involved the leak of national core technologies. As technology leakage crimes threaten national security has continued to increase, it is indicated that Korean companies must urgently prepare proactive response strategies.
In the briefing, a spokesperson from MOIP said, “to effectively respond to technology leakage and theft, 3 divisions including the technology leakage special judicial police division were newly established in June 2026 and the number of technical police officers increased from 27 to 61 …we will strengthen Korean technology security by securing the golden hour for detecting technology-driven crimes and protect Korean companies’ widening competitive advantage.”
Administrative investigation systems to respond to idea and information theft were also introduced. The spokesperson said, “civil and criminal proceedings alone have limitations in rapidly remedying damages from technology theft…As administrative investigations into unfair competition acts are effective means to clear blind spots in technology protection, if the theft of ideas including technical information or the unauthorized use of the information are suspected, it is necessary to actively utilize administrative investigations.”
Meanwhile, MOIP has operated, as a specialized investigative agency for patent, trademark, design and trade secret infringements, the special judicial police starting with crackdowns on counterfeit products in 2010, and it has started investigations into patent, design and trade secret infringements since 2019. A total of about 2,500 intellectual property offenders were criminally booked until last year, and a foreigner was arrested for attempting to smuggle the solid-state battery-related advanced technology overseas in February this year. The companies damaged by technology theft can get help through the one-stop intellectual property infringement reporting and counseling center (koipa.re.kr/ippolice, 1666-6464).
5. MOIP and Korea Consumer Agency (KCA) conducted a joint investigation on false intellectual property (IP) markings for cosmetics.
-634 cases of false intellectual property (IP) markings on everyday cosmetics were caught.
MOIP and KCA conducted a joint investigation on the state of IP marking on cosmetics sold online. As a result, a total of 634 cases of false marking were detected, including the display of expired rights, etc.
Since cosmetics are highly purchased online and applied directly to the body, it is crucial to provide accurate information on ingredients, functions, and effects. In particular, since marking, such as ‘patented ingredients’, etc., can greatly influence consumer choices, the two agencies started the joint investigation.
By type of right, false indication of ‘patent rights’ accounted for 626 cases (98.7%), followed by ‘design rights’ with 6 cases (0.9%), and ‘utility model rights’ and ‘trademark rights’ with 1 case each (0.2%).
By type of false markings, 514 cases (81.1%) indicated extinguished rights as valid, followed by 73 cases (11.5%) indicating non-existent rights numbers, etc., and 30 cases (4.7%) indicating that application marks are described for products of which applications are not filed.
By type of product, ‘hair care’ products accounted for the most with 242 cases (38.2%), followed by ‘skin care’ products with 97 cases (15.3%), ‘body care’ products with 91 cases (14.3%), and ‘cleansing’ products with 67 cases (10.6%). It is analyzed that false markings of IP rights occur more frequently in product groups emphasizing functional effects, such as anti-hair loss, etc., or specific ingredients, in order to appeal to consumers’ purchasing psychology.
MOIP have provided guidance on how to improve and correct the false markings detected in this investigation and completed the corrective actions. MOIP plans to manage violation history by seller and thus, if the same false marking is repeated in the future, it will be linked to an administrative investigation.
This joint investigation, which was based on the business agreement between MOIP and KCA, was conducted for the second time, following last year’s investigation on kitchenware. Notably, since a ‘citizen advertisement monitoring team’, consisting of ordinary citizens, directly participated in uncovering false markings, it is highly significant in that it enhanced the field-oriented nature of the investigation.
The citizen advertisement monitoring team of KCA directly uncovered suspected cases of false markings in major online marketplaces after taking education on the correct marking methods of IP rights and the major violation cases. With the activities of the citizen advertisement monitoring team, it is expected that the understanding and interest in IP marking will increase and the awareness of the importance of proper marking will naturally spread.
MOIP will continue to closely cooperate with KCA to correct the false IP marking on products closely related to people’s daily lives.
|
|
|
|
|
Prev |
|
Korean IP News No. 155 in Chines
|
|
|
Next |
|
Korean Industrial Insight No. 29 of AI, Semiconductors, Batteries, Electric vehicles, Robot, and Bio
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
