[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the response period for the notification of review opinions is generally four months from the date the applicant receives it. According to Article 37 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, if the applicant fails to respond within the time limit without a valid reason, the application will be deemed withdrawn. According to the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law, the applicant may request an extension of the time limit before the expiration of the time limit. The extension of the time limit shall be determined by the patent administrative department according to the actual situation, and the extension period shall generally not exceed two months. The applicant must submit the request and pay the corresponding fees before the expiration of the time limit. The response is not only a procedural obligation, but also directly related to the scope of authorization. It is necessary to complete the response of high quality within the time limit. For more details, please refer to the following link:Intellectual property protection and corporate legal services.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

During the substantive review stage, it is common for examiners to issue review opinion notifications regarding issues such as novelty, inventiveness, and sufficiency of disclosure. Typical scenarios include: applicants failing to pay attention to the notifications and missing the four-month response period, resulting in the application being deemed withdrawn; internal transmission delays causing technical staff to see the notifications when it was almost too late to respond; blindly responding with a simple "disagreement" without providing technical comparisons or amendments, leading to another rejection; and mistakenly believing that the deadline could be extended indefinitely and failing to request an extension in a timely manner. Many companies have lost their applications due to procedural oversights. For companies with patent portfolios, it is advisable to address these issues in a comprehensive manner.Intellectual property protection and corporate legal servicesSystem tracking.

II. Key points of contention

There are three key points of contention regarding the response deadline. Firstly, the starting point of the deadline: it begins from the date of "receipt", rather than the date of issuance, and the method of delivery affects the starting point. Secondly, the conditions for extending the deadline: it must be proposed and paid for before the deadline expires, and the extension of the deadline has an upper limit and is not automatically approved; it cannot be abused. Thirdly, the consequences and remedies after the deadline: failure to meet the deadline without a valid reason is considered a withdrawal, and only with a valid reason can a request for restoration be made. For matters involving the connection between patents and R&D contracts, reference can be made to the relevant provisions.Business and contract dispute services for enterprises.

III. Professional analysis by Hengluo Lawyers

Based on practical observations in handling patent review responses, late responses are often due to "underestimating the difficulty of responding". According to Article 37 of the Patent Law, the legal consequence of a late response is deemed as a withdrawal, with little room for negotiation. However, according to the Implementing Regulations, the request for an extension of the time limit must be submitted before the expiration date. Many applicants only realize that the materials are not ready when the deadline is approaching, which is too late. Hengluo Law Firm usually recommends starting work on the same day as receiving the notice: first identifying the comparison documents cited by the reviewer, judging the points of contention, and then deciding whether to amend the claims and draft a statement of opinion. For complex cases, it is a safe practice to request an extension of the time limit in advance to allow sufficient time for response. For cases involving review and invalidation, a follow-up can be made.Special services and other case services.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis is Article 37 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on October 17, 2020 and implemented on June 1, 2021): "A reply to the review opinion after the deadline shall be deemed as a withdrawal"; the provisions of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law regarding the deadline for replying to the review opinion of four months, the extension of the deadline shall be requested and the fees shall be paid before the deadline, and the restoration of rights. Practical suggestions: Record the receipt date and the expiration date on the day of receiving the notice; complete the reply or request for an extension of the deadline before the expiration of the deadline; the reply should address the novelty and inventiveness of the comparison documents, and necessary modifications to the claims should be made without exceeding the scope; promptly evaluate the possibility of restoration after the deadline. For cases involving rights protection and enforcement, it can be combined with other relevant provisions.Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case services.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Reminder

When responding to review comments, it is necessary to both "meet the deadline" and "ensure quality". The core requirement is to complete the response or request an extension of the deadline within four months from the date of receipt; any extension of the deadline must be requested and paid for in advance, and cannot be remedied at the last minute. Responses should avoid vague refutations. Instead, they should compare the documents to explain the differences in technical features and beneficial effects, and if necessary, amend the claims to overcome the deficiencies, provided that the amendments do not exceed the scope of the original specification. Once the deadline has passed, the response will be deemed withdrawn, and only with valid reasons can a request for restoration be made. It is recommended to establish deadline alerts, and major cases should be handled by professional agents. If necessary, process management services can be utilized to assist with the process.Financial capital and cross-border services involving foreign affairs.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If I don't respond to the review comments, will it definitely be considered as a withdrawal? Is there any grace period?

According to Article 37 of the Patent Law, if the applicant fails to respond to the review opinion within the prescribed time limit without a valid reason, the application shall be deemed withdrawn, with strict legal consequences and no automatic grace period. The so-called "grace period" only exists in two legal situations: first, requesting an extension of the time limit within four months and obtaining additional time after approval; second, requesting restoration of rights within the statutory time limit after the expiration of the time limit due to force majeure or other valid reasons. Subjective negligence does not constitute a valid reason, and the success rate of restoration is low. Therefore, applicants should not rely on the grace period. They should complete the response or request an extension before the deadline, proactively address procedural risks, and avoid losing their rights.

Q2: To respond to the review comments, what materials and evidence do I need to prepare?

The core materials include: the original review opinion notice and the cited comparison documents; the original application documents (description, claims, drawings); a statement of opinion on each rejection reason; and, if applicable, the amended version of the claims (which must be based on the original description and not exceed the scope); a comparison analysis of existing technologies; experimental data or proof of technical effects; and priority documents (if applicable). The materials should respond to the reviewer's questions item by item, highlighting the differences between technical features and creative contributions. It is recommended to keep the submission certificates and mailing records, and if necessary, have them written by professionals to enhance the persuasiveness of the responses.

Q3: What is the approximate cost of entrusting an agency to respond to the review comments?

At the official level, if a request for an extension of the time limit requires the payment of corresponding fees, the standard shall be implemented in accordance with the Patent Law and its Implementing Regulations; the agency fees vary depending on the difficulty of the response, the number of comparison documents, and whether it is necessary to modify the claims, and are determined through negotiation in the entrustment contract, without a unified government pricing. The cost of a simple response to a single review opinion is lower, while the cost of multiple rounds of responses, complex responses, or responses requiring additional experimental data is higher. It is recommended to clarify the billing method and scope when entrusting the work, and to agree on the responsibility for the quality of the responses. The overall fees should be commensurate with the value of the patent, to avoid hasty responses due to saving agency fees, which may lead to rejection or a narrowed scope of protection.

Q4: How long does it usually take from receiving the review comments to obtaining the final authorization?

It depends on the number of response rounds and the review workload. If the defects can be rectified with just one response, the reviewer usually makes an authorization decision within a few months; if multiple response rounds or corrections are needed, the cycle will be correspondingly prolonged, possibly spanning over multiple years. After each response, the reviewer may issue follow-up review opinions until an authorization or rejection is issued. If the application is rejected, a rebuttal review can be initiated, further prolonging the process. Overall, the pace of responses during the substantive review stage directly determines the speed of authorization. It is recommended to provide a high-quality response within the four-month deadline to reduce back-and-forth communication, shorten the authorization cycle, and avoid affecting product market launch and licensing arrangements.

Q5: After receiving the notice of review comments, what should I do first?

It is recommended to proceed in four steps: First, verify the receipt date and the deadline for response (usually four months from the date of receipt), and complete the response or request for an extension of the deadline before the deadline expires; Second, read the notification carefully, review the comparison documents cited by the reviewer and the reasons for rejection article by article, and identify disputes over novelty, creativity, or sufficient disclosure; Third, determine whether it is necessary to make non-overreaching amendments to the claims to overcome the defects. The amendments must be based on the original specification; Fourth, prepare a statement of opinion, respond to the reviewer's arguments based on the technical features and beneficial effects of the invention, and consult a professional agent if necessary. Throughout the process, keep all documents and submission certificates, and never ignore the deadline without taking any action.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the adjudication standards in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.