06/17/2026 2:57 PM

Patent Filing vis-à-vis PCT Route

Introduction:

The Patent filing route through the PCT is a single streamlined process for registering a patent at the multinational level, allowing one to defend their invention across diverse country jurisdictions. The process is the same as filing a trademark under the Madrid Protocol, with fees paid in a single payment, subject to the rules and regulations. In contrast, for filing a patent, either the PCT or the Paris Convention can be used to obtain priority rights. For patent registration, one must first file with the respective national patent office to seek clearance after secrecy is established; in India, the timeline is 6 weeks as per Section 39 of the Patents Act, 1970. This window, however, can be bypassed by seeking Form 25, the Foreign Filing License.

Thereafter, the assessment of the patent is overseen by the International Searching Authority, which provides a report on the probability of obtaining a patent for inventions, designs, machine programming code, etc. The whole process takes 30-31 months on the PCT route, and then one can access other countries' jurisdictions to register it. Further, this article will provide insight into patent registration and its advantages in the emerging technology world.

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) : A Strategic Tool

The complexity of patent registration across multiple jurisdictions is intended to be addressed through the PCT route, with strategic planning to determine where the inventor can invest based on market viability within a 30-31 month window. This timeline is not just for gaining priority on the inventions, but also gives the inventor space to assess the cost-effectiveness of the investments and study the legal nuances for gaining the targeted jurisdictional benefits after gaining access to the ISR (International Search Report).

The PCT has a broader approach than the Paris Convention, which has a 12-month time limit and a limited jurisdictional approach. So, when the PCT route is opted, it helps to strategies the patent process with a 30-31 month window. It acts as a search conducting station for prior art and also prepares an assessment report on the novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability of the invention. By having all this data, the risk of patent rejection in other countries is eliminated, and time is saved from conducting individual due diligence. Presently, there are 158 members, with Bahamas the newest. These member countries receive a ready-made examination report, which a patent investor planning to invest can use to improve their business by meeting the ground rules of the PCT route.

Furthermore, recently, a major amendment to the treaty expanded the definition of prior art to include non-written disclosures, e.g., audio-visual displays, e-publications, and conference tapes. This expansion has increased the risk of a patent being rejected when these non-written disclosures were not included, and no non-disclosure agreements were sought between the parties. Therefore, to save the patent from rejection, the PCT filing becomes heavily dependent on factors that maintain an ecosystem in which the patent is filed before any public disclosure, exemplifying that the time difference between the PCT filing and the inventors’ publicity is almost zero.

The nuts and bolts of the PCT: The Attorney’s Insight

The primary backbone of the PCT route is the ISR and Written Opinion; these two are groundbreaking assessment reports which act as a risk-mitigating factor for establishing a market in foreign nations, especially for those businesses that are startups or that have limited funds. The ISR prepared by the International Search Authority comes in handy for having a detailed prior art report of the inventions to figure out the technical and mechanical facets to establish if it's innovative or not. Further, depending on the positive or negative aspect of the report, the patent can be polished as per the market standards of the respective jurisdiction or can be ceased.

Where ISR acts as an insight into innovative standards, the written opinion acts as a legal non-enforceable opinion of the invention. There are three grounds under which it oversees, i.e., whether the invention is novel, what are the inventive steps taken for the invention to be born and if it satisfies the industrial factors. This report is widely taken note of by respective examiners of the nation, prospective investors and market facilitators while entering the national phase of any jurisdiction without facing any supplementary costs of encountering refusal. The filing has to take place as per the respective nation's municipal laws, and most countries have an extensive patent process; this opinion serves as a good ground for establishing that the patent is viable.

These two reports are for the international phase, where a singular platform is provided for registering pending patents smoothly while having access to multinational standards within 30-31 months. After deciding the jurisdiction, the national phase starts, within which a patent has to be registered and defended. However, in India, the window is for 31 months with no extension and stricter norms ensuring the security of the nation and preventing mishandling of diplomatic information. The following are the steps that need to be followed:

Forms 1, 2, 3, 5, and 26 are required to be submitted with the Indian Patent Office for giving details of the invention, applicant's name, translated version of the WIPO publication, establishing the authentic invention, etc.
Form 28, 9, 18, 18A is submitted for startups, female inventors, reinforcing examination, and to subsidise the timeline for pre-release of patent to the public.
A translated international application in English with a statement of it being true and correct needs to be filed with the IP office.
A 6-week clearance window has to be obtained as per section 39 of the Patent Act, 1970, for international filing or a Foreign Filing License. Without it, the risk of abandonment of every patent by the controller will be heightened to supposed abandonment as per section 40 of the Patents Act, 1970, and if it's granted, then it's liable to be revoked as per section 64 of the act. There is also criminal liability attached with imprisonment of 2 years and a fine as per section 118.
Conclusive action is the payment of fees depending upon the applicant's claims, based on the nature of the entity.

The Emerging Tech and PCT filing

Even though every aspect of patent filing is properly covered, there is a blind spot within AI-driven inventions with significant grey areas. For every PTC application, disclosure is a necessary step. The AI-related patentability faces hurdles in distinguishing between the original innovation and AI-generated invention in Indian filings. Even though India follows the EPO standards, which promote AI innovation with terms and conditions, India has stricter application of these guidelines as per section 3(k) of the Patents Act for AI-driven technology.

The guidelines are such that the grant of a patent is excluded from the time of filing if the product works on any mathematical algorithm with no technical result and human touch. It should have some concrete value attached to it as per 2025 guidelines which improves the performance quality of the existing tech like better transmission of signals, improved processing speed, storage, and accuracy viability.

Therefore the litmus test for the AI-driven product patent is that, it should be in the form of some tangible nature where its non-attachment will hamper the working of the software instead of some codes or algorithm, then the IP office won't be able to dismiss the registration of the invention. Also, there are different jurisdictions where the AI inventions face less stringency than India's patent legislations like the EPO, which requires perfect evidence of technical evidence which relates to the technical results and the USA also looks into the tangibility of the innovative ideas that could solve existing problems rather than just doing what's already there.

The Litigation Shield

A solid draft of the PCT application can strengthen the patent registration stance with the help of ISR and the Written Opinion of the experts. These reports point out the shortcomings which could hamper the registration. Therefore, it provides a shield from being rejected in different jurisdictions' municipal law and gives a clear picture of the cost-effectiveness of the invention in the market.

However, it has no binding effect on the applicant but the only advantage of it, is that the written opinion is considered for establishing legal reasoning from being rejected in various jurisdictions. It's only a single application route which if used manifestly could be used as a shield against the prior art claims, insufficient disclosure, AI-driven patent, novelty etc.

Conclusion

The PCT application route acts as a linkage between different applications filing jurisdictions, and the members of the PCT benefit from having larger market expansion options with its approval.

Author :- Samridhi, in case of any query, contact us at Global Patent Filing or write back us via email at support@globalpatentfiling.com.

References

← Back to All Insights