This page supports is intended to provide a platform for further exchanges of opinionsviews, discussions and proposals with regards to the proposed modification new Section 102bis of the Administrative Instructions under the PCT (“the Administrative Instruction”), before reaching any possible proposal to be submitted before the upcoming PCT Working Group currently scheduled in October 2022. For your reference, contained in Circular C. PCT 1625, dated June 15, 2021. The circular suggested to introduce a broader definition of what constitutes a "signature" in relation to paper documents. Namely,
New Section 102bis "Signature on Paper Documents" which reads:
"A signature provided on a paper document shall be handwritten, printed, typed or stamped."
Currently, neither the Regulations under the PCT (“PCT Rules”) nor the Administrative Instructions define what constitutes a “signature” for paper submissions, other than what is contained in PCT Rule 2.3 which clarifies that where the use of a seal is required instead of a signature under national law, any reference to signature in the PCT Regulations is to be understood as including a seal. Apart from the special case of a seal, it has generally been understood that a signature for paper submissions under the PCT system must be a handwritten ink signature. It should be noted that there is a definition of what constitutes an acceptable signature for electronic submissions provided in Annex F of the Administrative Instructions.
Although most PCT filings and submissions of documents are carried out in electronic form, there remains a certain percentage of documents which are still submitted to PCT Offices and Authorities in paper form. Also, the necessity of broadening a definition what constitutes a signature could be supported under the COVID-19 pandemic which brought significant changes to work environments. Notably, many companies and organizations made transitions to working-from-home for public health reasons. Under such circumstances, it has become less practical for applicants to circulate paper documents and obtain handwritten signatures on paper documents.
While most responses to the Circular supported the introduction of a new definition in the Administrative Instructions, several offices raised concerns and/or suggested counter proposals. The main feedback and counter proposals can be summarized as follows. Firstly, a few Member States questioned the practical necessity of introducing a new definition. Secondly, some Member States requested further discussions on some of the suggested new types of signatures, notably the “printed signature” and the “typed signature”, and emphasized the importance of more detailed description of these notions. Thirdly, two Offices made provided counter proposals. One of these Offices wished to allow for any valid form of signature before an IP Office to be recognized during the international phase, provided that Office had notified the International Bureau of the types of signature that it accepted. The other counter proposal concerned the language of the provision, allowing for an proposed provision and suggested rather than oblige all Office to accept signatures in different formscertain type of signatures in addition to ink signatures, to only authorize to accept certain other types of signatures if the Office so wishes.
The International Bureau therefore wished to discuss this issue further to reach consensus on introducing a new definition. feels that the comments received so far did not show full agreement amongst Office on how to best proceed with the proposed new Section. As a result, further discussions amongst Office on the subject matter appear necessary. By exchanging views via this PCT Working Group wiki, it is envisaged to find an optimal "one definition" of the signature types which will be applied by any International Authorities during all the International Phases of the PCT procedure as a formality requirement.hoped that an agreement can be reached. In the view of the International Bureau, such a solution should ideally be placed on the following principles:
- legal certainty (it needs to be clear to applicants what type of signatures will be acceptable: signatures accepted by one Office should not be open to questions by other Offices and Authorities both in the international, and the national phase
- avoiding of adding complexity to the PCT system
Points to be discussed:
The below three points need further discussions. To continue discussions, please click each discussion point (sub page) on the left side space linked to this page and post your comments.
- The practical necessity of introducing a new definition ("Practical Necessity").
- Definitions and more detailed descriptions of each type of signature "print", "typed" and "stamped" ("Definitions and Descriptions").
- Other proposals addressed in response to the above Circular ("Other Proposals").