<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Novartis to Drop USD 1 Billion on a China R&amp;D Facility</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chinahearsay.com/novartis-to-drop-usd-1-billion-on-a-china-rd-facility/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chinahearsay.com/novartis-to-drop-usd-1-billion-on-a-china-rd-facility/</link>
	<description>China law, business and economics commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:55:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philippe</title>
		<link>http://www.chinahearsay.com/novartis-to-drop-usd-1-billion-on-a-china-rd-facility/comment-page-1/#comment-75446</link>
		<dc:creator>Philippe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinahearsay.com/?p=4132#comment-75446</guid>
		<description></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am happy to see that we are on the same page.<br />
Article 20 of the new patent law states that “any entity or individual may file an application in a foreign country for an invention-creation completed in China, subject to a prior security examination by the patent administration department under the State Council”. In other words, for any invention made on the Chinese territory, the third amendment removes the mandatory first filing application in China. Consequently, it allows applicants to apply abroad for foreign patents before filing a patent application in China. However, the patent authorities keep the right to review the applicant’s invention to protect the national security of the People’s Republic of China. As pointed out in article 71 of the new law, any applicant who fails to obtain a foreign filing license from China and still apply for a patent abroad will be subjected to disciplinary sanction and will loose any right to obtain further protection in China.</p>
<p>So, it is indeed an improvement. Most countries, if not all of them, have this “security clearance procedure”. Of course, China being….China, we have to be cautious (but not paranoid): we’ll see what the “implementing measures” will state (when published…) to understand a bit better how it is done in theory, and a few months more to know how it is really done!</p>
<p>By the way, not interested by a relocation to mysterious Changshu ? <img src='http://www.chinahearsay.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stan</title>
		<link>http://www.chinahearsay.com/novartis-to-drop-usd-1-billion-on-a-china-rd-facility/comment-page-1/#comment-75440</link>
		<dc:creator>Stan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinahearsay.com/?p=4132#comment-75440</guid>
		<description>Yes, my comment on that was slightly incorrect actually. Under most of the drafts of the Patent Law amendments (which became effective this year), there was a requirement that companies in China must file for a PRC patent before filing abroad.

In the final version passed by the NPC, that provision was modified, removing the absolute requirement for a China-first filing. However, it is my understanding that a security clearance (handled by the SIPO, China&#039;s Patent Office) will be put into place instead for companies wishing to file for foreign patent protection first. I&#039;m assuming that foreign-invested enterprises are treated as domestic entities, as they are in most areas of Chinese law.

The real question of course is to what extent the government may interfere via this SIPO security clearance procedure. Will it just be a formality? How long will it take? In other words, will this have an adverse effect on foreign-invested R&amp;D facilities in China?

Since China is loving all this investment in R&amp;D for a variety of reasons, I doubt that much interference would be forthcoming. However, it is still a slight worry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, my comment on that was slightly incorrect actually. Under most of the drafts of the Patent Law amendments (which became effective this year), there was a requirement that companies in China must file for a PRC patent before filing abroad.</p>
<p>In the final version passed by the NPC, that provision was modified, removing the absolute requirement for a China-first filing. However, it is my understanding that a security clearance (handled by the SIPO, China&#8217;s Patent Office) will be put into place instead for companies wishing to file for foreign patent protection first. I&#8217;m assuming that foreign-invested enterprises are treated as domestic entities, as they are in most areas of Chinese law.</p>
<p>The real question of course is to what extent the government may interfere via this SIPO security clearance procedure. Will it just be a formality? How long will it take? In other words, will this have an adverse effect on foreign-invested R&amp;D facilities in China?</p>
<p>Since China is loving all this investment in R&amp;D for a variety of reasons, I doubt that much interference would be forthcoming. However, it is still a slight worry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philippe</title>
		<link>http://www.chinahearsay.com/novartis-to-drop-usd-1-billion-on-a-china-rd-facility/comment-page-1/#comment-75439</link>
		<dc:creator>Philippe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chinahearsay.com/?p=4132#comment-75439</guid>
		<description>Hello Stan,
Could you elaborate a bit more on your point about IP, and the ne patent law?
Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Stan,<br />
Could you elaborate a bit more on your point about IP, and the ne patent law?<br />
Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (enhanced) (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 7/15 queries in 0.028 seconds using disk
Content Delivery Network via N/A

Served from: www.chinahearsay.com @ 2012-02-09 11:27:56 -->
