Share:
Patent classifications are a key ingredient of comprehensive patent research, analysis, and intelligence projects. They simplify the search process, improve accuracy, and enable extensive analysis with categorizations for patents. They help make information retrieval more efficient by grouping patents belonging to the same technical subdivision together.
They also serve as a universal taxonomy, allowing inventors, researchers, and patent examiners to communicate effectively.
Types of patent classification systems
1. Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC):
The CPC is a widely used patent classification system created in collaboration by the European Patent Office (EPO) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It is intended to harmonize both offices’ classification practices and to offer a hierarchical structure for organizing patents into technology-specific categories.
The CPC provides more specific sub classification within various technology domains, allowing for more granular categorization of inventions. This detailed subclassification enables users to navigate through increasingly specialized areas of technology, making it easier to identify patents relevant to specific inventions or subject matter. By offering a higher level of detail, the CPC facilitates more precise and accurate searches for fast-moving technology areas.
Strengths: The CPC is a more detailed and granular classification system jointly developed by the European Patent Office (EPO) and the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It combines elements from the IPC and adds more specific subclasses.
Weaknesses: As the CPC is a newer classification system, its coverage may not be as extensive as the IPC. The transition from IPC to CPC is still ongoing, so there may be inconsistencies and variations in the implementation and application of the CPC codes across different patent offices.
2. International Patent Classification (IPC):
The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) manages the IPC, which is an internationally recognized classification system. It classifies patents according to technological disciplines and provides a standardized framework for patent offices around the world. The IPC is divided into sections, classes, subclasses, and groups, providing for exact patent categorization.
Strengths: The IPC is a widely recognized and used classification system managed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It provides a comprehensive and hierarchical classification structure covering various fields of technology.
Weaknesses: The IPC may not always keep pace with rapidly evolving technologies, and updates to the classification system can be slow. Some specific technology areas may not have detailed subclassification, leading to broader categorization.
3. Locarno Classification:
This classification is used for industrial designs. WIPO manages it and classifies designs into classes and subclasses depending on their aesthetic and functional properties. The Locarno Classification facilitates effective industrial design patent searching and analysis.
Strengths: The Locarno Classification focuses on categorizing patents specifically related to industrial designs. As a classification system managed by the World Intellectual Property Organization, it benefits from international recognition and harmonization efforts.
Weaknesses: The Locarno Classification may not provide comprehensive classification for patents outside the scope of industrial designs.
The classification system primarily focuses on aesthetic properties and does not offer detailed subclassification for functional features.
4. JP FI and F TERM:
JP FI (Japanese FI) is the Japanese Patent Office’s patent categorization system, whereas FTERM (File Term) is a proprietary classification method used by the Japanese patent information providers.
Strengths: These classification systems are designed to categorize and search Japanese patents.
JP FI is the official categorization system used by the Japanese Patent Office, while FTERM offers a proprietary classification method that classifies patent documents according to the technical features of the inventions.
Weaknesses: These classification systems are relevant only for Japanese patents.
5. US Patent Categorization (USPC):
Prior to the CPC, the USPTO employed an older categorization system called the USPC. The USPC categorized patents into classes and subclasses based on their subject matter. The USPC is still useful for historical patent research and analysis, even though it’s not used anymore for new patents.
Strengths: The USPC provides detailed subclassification for specific technology areas.
Weaknesses: The USPC is primarily focused on US patents, which may limit its applicability for global patent searching. It has been phased out and the USPTO has transitioned to the CPC.
Benefits of using classifications to search for patents
1. Efficient retrieval – Classification systems provide a systematic framework that allows researchers to explore enormous patent libraries and obtain relevant patents based on certain technological areas.
2. Comprehensive analysis – Patent classification facilitates thorough patent analysis by allowing researchers to investigate patents in specific technical domains, analyze technological trends, and assess the competitive landscape.
3. Improved accuracy – Using patent classifications, researchers can filter out extraneous patents and focus on specific areas of interest, resulting in more accurate and tailored search results.
4. Saving time and resources – Patent classification systems simplify the search process, requiring less time and effort to identify and analyze relevant patents. Researchers can better organize their resources, resulting in higher output.
Conclusion:
Patent classifications play a crucial role in accurate and insightful patent search and analysis. Interestingly, the USPTO has recently made an auto-classification AI tool that classifies patent applications according to the CPC. More specifically, it can recommend CPC classes and link them to related subject matter present in applications. This has helped the USPTO cut down on their expenses for obtaining CPC data.
