E

CWS/5/22
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
DATE: AUGUST 1, 2017

Committee on WIPO Standards (CWS)

Fifth Session
Geneva, May 29 to June 2, 2017

REPORT

adopted by the Committee

INTRODUCTION
1. The Committee on WIPO Standards (hereinafter referred to as “the Committee”, or “the
CWS”) held its fifth session in Geneva from May 29 to June 2, 2017.

2. The following Member States of WIPO and/or members of the Paris Union and Bern
Union were represented at the session: Argentina; Australia; Austria; Brazil; Canada; Chile;
China; Colombia; Costa Rica; Czech Republic; El Salvador; France; Georgia; Germany;
Hungary; India; Indonesia; Iran (Islamic Republic of); Italy; Côte d’Ivoire; Japan; Kuwait;
Lithuania; Mexico; Panama; Philippines; Republic of Korea; Romania; Russian Federation;
Saudi Arabia; South Africa; Spain; Sweden; Thailand; The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia; Ukraine; United Arab Emirates; United Kingdom; United States of America and
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of (40).

3. In their capacity as members of the CWS, the representatives of the following

intergovernmental organizations took part in the session: the African Intellectual Property
Organization (OAPI); the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO);
the Eurasian Patent Organization (EAPO); the European Patent Office (EPO); the European
Union (EU); the Patent Office of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC
Patent Office) and the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties
of Plants (UPOV) (7).

4. Representatives of the following non-governmental organizations took part in the meeting

in an observer capacity: The Confederacy of Patent Information User Groups (CEPIUG);
the International Federation of Inventors’ Associations (IFIA); the International Video
Federation (IVF); and the Patent Information Users Group (PIUG) (4).
 CWS/5/22
page 2

5. The participation of seven Delegations from Least Developed Countries (LDCs) or

developing countries was financed by WIPO in accordance with the decision taken by the
General Assembly in 2011.

6. The list of participants appears as Annex I to this report.

Agenda Item 1: Opening of the session

7. The fifth session was opened by the Director General of WIPO, Mr. Francis Gurry, who
welcomed the participants and emphasized the importance of WIPO Standards for facilitating
the exchange and processing of big volumes of IP data in accurate and timely manner through
a single common framework for IP information and documentation, which is extremely important
in the current era of Big Data.

Agenda Item 2: Election of the Chair and two Vice-Chairs

8. The CWS unanimously elected Ms. Katja BRABEC (Germany) as Chair, and
Ambassador Alfredo SUESCUM (Panama) as Vice-Chair.

9. Young-Woo YUN, Head, Standards Section, acted as Secretary of the session.

Agenda Item 3: Adoption of the agenda

10. The CWS unanimously adopted the agenda as proposed in document CWS/5/1 PROV. 3,
which appears as Annex II to this report.

PRESENTATIONS
11. The presentations given at this session of the CWS and working documents are available
on the WIPO website at: http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=42285.

DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISIONS

12. As decided by the Governing Bodies of WIPO at their tenth series of meetings held from
September 24 to October 2, 1979 (see document AB/X/32, paragraphs 51 and 52), the report of
this session reflects only the conclusions of the CWS (decisions, recommendations, opinions,
etc.) and does not, in particular, reflect the statements made by any participant, except where a
reservation in relation to any specific conclusion of the CWS was expressed or repeated after
the conclusion was reached.

Agenda Item 4: Report on the Survey on the Use of WIPO Standards

13. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/2 and the presentation made by the
International Bureau.

14. The CWS noted the content of document CWS/5/2, in particular the report on results of
the Survey on the use of WIPO Standards, summarized in paragraphs 6 to 9 thereof. Industrial
property offices (IPOs) of the following 31 countries submitted their responses to the survey:
Australia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bangladesh, Canada, China, Colombia, Czech Republic,
Germany, Spain, Honduras, Croatia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Korea,
Lithuania, Republic of Moldova, Mexico, Oman, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Sweden,
Slovakia, El Salvador, Tunisia, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Uganda, United States of
America and South Africa. The participants agreed that the report was useful to assess the
level of the implementation of WIPO Standards in IPOs and better understand the remaining
obstacles in this process.

15. The CWS encouraged IPOs, which had not submitted their responses to the survey, to do
so; the Secretariat was requested to issue a Circular through Note Verbale inviting IPOs to
submit or amend their responses to the Survey on the use of WIPO Standards, if necessary.
 CWS/5/22
page 3

16. The CWS approved the publication of the Survey on the use of WIPO Standards as
Part 7.12 of the WIPO Handbook on Industrial Property Information and Documentation
(WIPO Handbook).

17. The CWS agreed to move WIPO Standards ST.7 to ST.7/F and ST.30 to the
Archive, which is also available on WIPO website.

18. With respect to WIPO Standards listed in paragraph 11 of document CWS/5/2,

namely, WIPO Standards relevant for paper publication: ST.10/D, ST.12/C, ST.18, ST.19,
ST.20 and ST.21; and WIPO Standards related to technologies, which were outdated:
ST.31 (character sets), ST.32 (SGML), ST.33 (facsimile), ST.34 (recording of application
numbers), ST.35 (mixed-mode) and ST.40 (facsimile on CD-ROM), the CWS agreed to
keep them in the WIPO Handbook and revisit the issue when the extended survey results
would be presented for consideration by the CWS.

19. The CWS requested the International Bureau to continue and intensify its efforts in
providing technical assistance to the Member States and to follow-up on the cases referred to in
paragraph 8 (c) of document CWS/5/2, as well as other cases in the future which would require
awareness building and technical assistance. These activities should be reflected in the report
by the International Bureau on the provision of technical advice and assistance for capacity
building to IPOs to the CWS.

Agenda Item 5: Decision of the 48th session of the WIPO General Assembly in relation to
the CWS, including Development Agenda matters1
20. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/3.

21. Some delegations stated that the CWS was a relevant Committee to report on the
implementation of the WIPO Development Agenda recommendations to the General Assembly
and that the International Bureau should intensify its efforts in providing technical assistance for
capacity building in order to ensure that WIPO Standards are implemented in all IPOs to the
maximum possible degree.

22. Some other delegations did not support the link between coordination mechanism and the
work of the CWS; they emphasized the technical nature of the CWS and the fact that the
implementation of WIPO Standards is often achieved through the use of WIPO software
solutions for IPOs.

23. The Delegation of Brazil requested that its statement be included verbatim in the present
report:

“The approval of the Development Agenda in 2007 was a landmark for the Organization.
After many years of discussion, development considerations at last were recognized as in
need of forming an integral part of WIPO’s work. A coordination mechanism approved in
2010 in order to monitor and assess the implementation of the Development Agenda
throughout the organization. As contained in document WO/GA/39/7, 'All WIPO Committees
stand on an equal footing and report to the Assemblies', and we view the CWS as fully
under the purview of that decision.

“We cannot differentiate between technical and non-technical bodies, since all discussions
related to IP involve technical aspects. At the same time, we are indeed an organization
under the UN umbrella and development objectives must be part of our work, all of it.
Specifically on the contribution of the CWS to the implementation of the Development

1
This agenda item is without prejudice to the Members' positions on a question as to whether the CWS is relevant to
Development Agenda coordination mechanism.
 CWS/5/22
page 4

Agenda, there is naturally the matter of technical assistance, whose necessity is reflected in
document CWS/5/2 that we have just discussed. Those efforts by WIPO should be guided
by the relevant development agenda recommendations and we urge the organization to
continue to support it. The Development Agenda´s clusters, however, cover a wide area
which is not limited to technical assistance. We should also consider its relation with the
standards agreed in it. While non-binding to Members, they effectively serve to guide the
work of IP Offices that choose to adopt them. Therefore, inclusivity and an evaluation on the
balance between costs and benefits should always be the basis of the work of the CWS.

“The implementation of the Development Agenda is an on-going and non-exhaustive

activity in WIPO. The mainstreaming of development considerations into WIPO´s activities
requires the effort of all Members. We remain committed to the Development Agenda and
urge others to cooperate with that goal in view.”

24. The CWS took note of the decision of the 48th session of the WIPO General
Assembly related to the CWS.

Agenda Item 6: Extension of WIPO Standard ST.96 to incorporate Extensible Markup

Language (XML) schema for orphan works and geographical indications
25. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/4, which contained two proposals for the
extension of WIPO Standard ST.96 to include data elements regarding orphan works and
geographical indications.

26. The Delegation of the Russian Federation presented its proposal to extend WIPO
Standard ST.96 to incorporate XML schema for geographical indications as reproduced in
Annex II to document CWS/5/4. The CWS noted wide support to the proposal and a
suggestion, for future work, regarding possible functionalities of search and registration systems
for geographical indications.

27. The CWS approved the extension of WIPO Standard ST.96 to cover geographical
indications by incorporating new XML schema components and other associated data in
relation to geographical indications into WIPO Standard ST.96.

28. The CWS agreed to create a new Task, whose description would read “Develop
XML schema components for geographical indications” and assigned the new Task to the
XML4IP Task Force.

29. The CWS requested the International Bureau to invite its Members to nominate
experts on geographical indications to the XML4IP Task Force. The CWS also requested
the Task Force to report on the progress regarding the new Task at its sixth session.

30. The Delegation of the United Kingdom presented its proposal to extend WIPO Standard
ST.96 to incorporate XML schema for orphan works for mutually compatible technical standards
which would facilitate the exchange of orphan works data as reproduced in Annex I to document
CWS/5/4.

31. Several delegations and one representative supported the proposal; one delegation stated
that it might be premature to develop data standards for orphan works since many countries
had not adopted orphan works regime. Another delegation suggested that it might be
necessary to define the scope of the term “orphan works” so that it would cover all existing
practices.
 CWS/5/22
page 5

32. The CWS agreed to create a new Task, whose description would read “Study the
copyright orphan works data elements and naming conventions and compare them in
view of the proposal to extend WIPO Standard ST.96, report the outcome of the study and
present a proposal for consideration by the CWS to develop a data dictionary and XML
schemas for inclusion of copyright orphan works in WIPO Standard ST.96”. The CWS
designated the Intellectual Property Office of the United Kingdom (UK IPO) and the
International Bureau as co-leaders of the new Task.

Agenda Item 7: Report on Task No. 41 by the XML4IP Task Force

33. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/5.

34. The CWS noted the results of the work of the XML4IP Task Force and the work plan of
the XML4IP Task Force, as set out in document CWS/5/5.

35. The International Bureau, as the Task Force Leader, informed the CWS that the new
version 3.0 of WIPO Standard ST.96 was planned to be released in October 2017; the version
would include the following new XML schema components:

• Bibliographic data for Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC)

• Patent search report
• Patent record
• Madrid System electronic communication
• Hague System electronic communication

36. The International Bureau presented the draft high-level roadmap describing the vision for
the future of the electronic data exchange under the Hague System as reproduced in the Annex
to document CWS/5/5. The CWS noted that, after the development of the comprehensive
ST.96 Hague schema components for communication with the contracting Parties, the
International Bureau planned to use WIPO Standard ST.96 as the authoritative format for all
data exchange under the Hague System; the CWS was informed that the existing data format,
Hague DTD, would be gradually discontinued during a sunset period, at the end of which the
International Bureau would no longer support the legacy DTD data format.

37. Several delegations requested that the International Bureau extend the proposed sunset
period of the current DTD format by one year, which would lead the sunset period to the end of
2020; this would give IPOs more time to prepare a transition from the current DTD format to the
new XML schema format based on WIPO Standard ST.96. The International Bureau noted the
request.

38. The CWS also noted that the XML4IP Task Force meeting in person would take place in
Canada in September 2017.

Agenda Item 8: Revision of WIPO Standard ST.26

39. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/6, which contained a proposal to revise
WIPO Standard ST.26 and the results of the work of the Sequence Listings Task Force.

40. The CWS considered the proposal for the revision of WIPO Standard ST.26, version 1.1,
including the proposed modifications to the main body of ST.26 and its Annexes I to III and the
addition of the new Annex VI (Guidance Document), as described in document CWS/5/6 and as
reproduced in Annex II to document CWS/5/6.

41. The CWS adopted the revised WIPO Standard ST.26, version 1.1, as reproduced in
Annex II to document CWS/5/6 with the editorial changes in Annex VI (Guidance
Document) and in Annex II (DTD) to the revised ST.26 as suggested by the Delegation of
the United States of America and the Secretariat, respectively.
 CWS/5/22
page 6

Agenda Item 9: Recommendations for the transition provision from WIPO Standard ST.25 to
ST.26
42. Discussions were based on documents CWS/5/7 Rev.1 and CWS/5/7 Rev.1 ADD.

43. The CWS had requested the Sequence Listings Task Force to present a proposal for
transition provisions from WIPO Standard ST.25 to ST.26 for consideration and approval at this
session. Following the request of the CWS and taking into account the result of the consultation
carried out by the International Bureau by the means of the Circular C. PCT 1485/C. CWS 75,
the Sequence Listing Task Force presented a proposal for the transition scenario, the reference
date for the international applications, filed after the transition date and claiming priority from an
application with a sequence listing filed in ST.25 format, and the transition date (see paragraphs
4 to 8 of document CWS/5/7 Rev.1).

44. Following the discussions, the CWS reached an agreement on the “big bang”
scenario as the option for the transition from WIPO Standard ST.25 to ST.26, the
international filing date as the reference date and January 2022 as the transition date.
The CWS noted the document regarding potential added or deleted matter presented by
the Delegation of the United States of America.

45. The CWS assigned the following task to the Sequence Listings Task Force:
(a) support the International Bureau by providing users’ requirements and
feedback on the ST.26 authoring and validation software tool;
(b) support the International Bureau in the consequential revision of the PCT
Administrative Instructions; and
(c) prepare necessary revisions of WIPO Standard ST.26 upon request by the
CWS.

Agenda Item 10: Presentation on the development of WIPO ST.26 software tool
46. Discussions were based on the presentation made by the International Bureau regarding
the development of the WIPO ST.26 authoring and validation software tool.

47. The International Bureau informed the CWS that it would develop the new common
software tool to enable applicants to prepare sequence listings and verify that such sequence
listings are in compliance with WIPO Standard ST.26 (to the extent determinable by a
computer); this tool would also facilitate the processing of the application containing the
sequence listings in IPOs.

48. The CWS noted that the International Bureau planned to complete the project on the
development of the software tool by the end of 2018 and distribute it to applicants and IPOs
around the globe. The CWS also noted the draft high-level roadmap for the transition from
WIPO Standard ST.25 to ST.26 proposed by the International Bureau; the roadmap included
the proposed tentative timeline in relation to the revision of PCT Administrative Instructions,
modification of national regulations (if needed) and upgrade of IPOs’ IT systems, which covered
the period from 2017 to 2021.

Agenda Item 11: New WIPO Standard for the exchange of patent legal status data by industrial
property offices
49. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/8 Rev.1, which contained a proposal for a
new WIPO standard on the exchange of patent legal status data by IPOs; the proposal had
been prepared by the Legal Status Task Force within the framework of Task No. 47.
 CWS/5/22
page 7

50. The CWS adopted a new WIPO Standard ST.27 “Recommendation for the
exchange of patent legal status data”, as reproduced in the Annex to document CWS/5/8
Rev.1 with the following amendments:

(a) the amended first sentence of paragraph 35 should read “In addition to the
mapping process described in paragraph 33 above, this Standard
recommends that IPOs map their national/regional events to a detailed
event.”; and

(b) in the introductory text of Annex IV to ST.27, the words “the model template”
were replaced with “the suggested model template”.

51. The CWS approved the following Editorial Note to be included in the new WIPO
Standard ST.27:

Editorial Note by the International Bureau

“The detailed events included in this Standard are provisional and will be reviewed
and assessed by industrial property offices (IPOs) for one year. On the basis of the
outcome of the review and assessment reported by IPOs, a final proposal on the
detailed events in this Standard will be submitted for approval at the sixth session of
the CWS. IPOs may choose to exchange legal status data on the basis of
categories and key events only, if they so desire.”

“The Committee on WIPO Standards (CWS) adopted the present standard at its fifth
session on June 2, 2017.”

52. The CWS requested the Secretariat to issue a circular to invite IPOs to assess their
business practices and IT systems and review the provisional detailed events which were
included in the new WIPO Standard ST.27.

53. The CWS requested the Legal Status Task Force

(a) to finalize the list of detailed events and the guidance document for patent
legal status data and present them for consideration and approval at its sixth
session; and

(b) to prepare a recommendation for the exchange of legal status data on

trademarks and industrial designs and present a progress report on it for
consideration at its sixth session.

54. The CWS requested the XML4IP Task Force to develop, in consultation with the
Legal Status Task Force, XML schema components based on the new WIPO Standard
ST.27 in order to facilitate the exchange of patent legal status data. The CWS also
requested that the outcome be reported at its sixth session.

55. The CWS revised the description of Task No. 47 to read as follows:
“Prepare a final proposal for the detailed events and a guidance document with
regard to patent legal status data; prepare a recommendation for the exchange of
legal status data on trademarks and industrial designs by industrial property offices.”

56. The CWS took note that there might be an inconsistency between the date format
recommended in the new standard referring to WIPO Standard ST.2, and the future XML
schema components for legal status based on the WIPO Standard ST.96.
 CWS/5/22
page 8

57. Considering the potential inconsistency mentioned above, the CWS requested the
Secretariat to review the recommended date format(s) in WIPO Standards and report the
outcome at its sixth session.

Agenda Item 12: New WIPO Standard for an authority file of patent documents published by a
patent office
58. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/9, which contained a proposal for new
recommendations on authority files of patent documents published by IPOs.

59. The CWS noted the report on the work of the Authority File Task Force, as reproduced in
Annex I to document CWS/5/9.

60. The CWS adopted new WIPO Standard ST.37 “Recommendation for an authority
file of published patent documents”, as reproduced in Annex II to document CWS/5/9, with
the following modifications:

(a) the definition of code “E” in paragraph 23 was amended to read: “Publication
number allocated by the IPO representing a PCT national/regional phase entry
(for example Euro-PCT). No corresponding document published. A Euro-PCT
application is an international (PCT) patent application that entered the
European regional phase.”;

(b) the following sentence was added to paragraph 29: “If the IP office uses
application number formats in the Authority File that are different from those
used on the original publication, an explanation of the format should be
provided in the definition file”; and

(c) the definition of code “E” in Annex I was changed to “PCT applications which
have not been republished”.

61. The CWS approved the following editorial note to be included in the new WIPO
Standard ST.37:

Editorial Note by the International Bureau

“Annexes III and IV to the present Standard, which define XML schema (XSD) and
Data Type Definition (DTD), are under preparation by the Authority File Task Force.
They are planned to be presented for consideration and adoption by the Committee
on WIPO Standards (CWS) at its sixth session in 2018.”

“Until the said Annexes are adopted by the CWS, the only recommended format for
the purpose of this Standard is text.”

62. The CWS noted that the data collected under paragraph 34 of the new WIPO Standard
ST.37 (overview of the data coverage) could be extracted and used by the International Bureau
in the preparation of its intellectual property statistics products.

63. The CWS revised the description of Task No. 51 to read as follows:
“Prepare and present for consideration at the sixth session of the CWS, to be held in
2018, Annex III “XML schema (XSD)” and Annex IV “Data Type Definition (DTD)” to
WIPO Standard ST.37 “Recommendation for an authority file of published patent
documents.”

64. In addition to the revised Task, the CWS requested the Authority File Task Force to
consider how the authority files should be disseminated by IPOs and to present a
proposal for consideration at its sixth session.
 CWS/5/22
page 9

Agenda Item 13: Report on the preparation of a new WIPO Standard for the electronic
management of motion and multimedia marks
65. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/10.

66. The CWS noted the report prepared by the International Bureau on the work of the
Trademark Standardization Task Force and the results of the survey on IPOs’ practices related
to motion and multimedia marks, as reproduced in document CWS/5/10 and its Annex.

67. The CWS agreed to postpone the development of the recommendations on

electronic management of motion and multimedia marks until 2019 – the year of the
expected implementation of the directive 2008/95/EC of October 22, 2008, by IPOs
concerned. The CWS also agreed to hold Task No. 49 in abeyance until then.

Agenda Item 14: Report on Task No. 50 by the Part 7 Task Force
68. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/11.

69. The CWS noted the progress report and the tentative plan for maintenance and update of
the surveys published in Part 7 of the WIPO Handbook, in particular, the actions to be carried
out following the fifth session of the CWS, as indicated in Annex II to document CWS/5/11.

70. The CWS agreed on the following approach to the publication of new and updated
surveys in Part 7 of the WIPO Handbook:
(a) For a (regular) update of a survey based on the questionnaire approved by the
CWS, which is already in the WIPO Handbook, the International Bureau
should publish the updated survey and inform the CWS at the session
following the publication.
(b) For new surveys, their publication in Part 7 of the WIPO Handbook should be
approved by the CWS.
(c) For a survey update based on a revised questionnaire (effectively a new
survey), the publication of the updated survey in Part 7 of the WIPO Handbook
should be approved by the CWS.

71. The CWS requested the Part 7 Task Force to prepare a proposal for the questionnaire on
numbering of published documents and registered rights and to present the proposal for
consideration at its sixth session. The questionnaire should cover current and former practices
of numbering of published documents and registered rights.

72. The CWS requested the International Bureau

(a) to invite IPOs to update their entries in Part 7.2.4 “Survey on the presentation of
priority application numbers”, and subsequently to prepare and publish the updated
Part 7.2.4 of the WIPO Handbook; and

(b) to request the International Bureau to move Part 7.2.1 to the Archive, replace the
reference in ST.10/C with Part 7.2.6 (editorial change) and include the link to the
archived Part 7.2.1 in Part 7.2.6.
 CWS/5/22
page 10

Agenda Item 15: Report on the Survey on application and priority application numbering
systems used by industrial property offices in the past
73. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/12.

74. The CWS noted that in March 2017 the International Bureau published the updated Part
7.2.6 of the WIPO Handbook “Numbering of applications and priority applications – Current
practices”; the entries covering practices of the following 18 IPOs were amended or added:
Austria, Australia, Belgium, China, Germany, Spain, United Kingdom, Croatia, Ireland, Italy,
Japan, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia,
Sweden and Slovakia.

75. The CWS also noted the results of the survey on former practices of application and
priority application numbering as reproduced in the Annex to document CWS/5/12. The new
Part 7.2.7 of the WIPO Handbook contained 12 entries covering practices of the following IPOs:
Australia, China, Germany, Estonia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Lithuania, Russian Federation,
Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Soviet Union and Ukraine.

76. The CWS agreed to publish the said results as new Part 7.2.7 of the WIPO
Handbook “Numbering of applications and priority applications – former practices”.

77. The Delegation of the United States of America stated that the information regarding the
former practices of application numbering implemented in the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) had been submitted to the Secretariat prior to the session and
requested that it be included in new Part 7.2.7 of the WIPO Handbook.

78. The CWS agreed to consider Task No. 30 “survey industrial property offices on
application and priority application numbers used” as completed and to remove it from the
Task List of the CWS; it also agreed to discontinue the ST.10/C Task Force.

Agenda Item 16: Questionnaire on industrial property protection extensions (IPPEs)

79. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/13.

80. The CWS considered the proposed questionnaire on IPPEs and identified the following
substantive issues to be amended:

(a) In some cases, national authorities other than IPOs were involved in the processing
of IPPE information. The circular inviting IPOs to complete the questionnaire and
questions 6, 8 and 10 should emphasize the importance of reflecting in the responses the
practices of all relevant authorities;

(b) The list of products in question 3 should be amended as follows: medicinal products,
plant protection products, all products subject to regulatory approval for marketing and
other;

(c) Question 3 should contain a sub-question regarding the possibility to request

administrative extensions of IP rights, like, for example, patent term adjustments (PTAs);

(d) The term “products” is not applicable to some IPPEs, like for example, PTAs;
question 4 should be amended accordingly; and

(e) The questionnaire should include two new questions, similar to questions 8 and 9,
regarding the elements included in the publication in case of coming into force of an IPPE;
question 10 should be amended accordingly.
 CWS/5/22
page 11

81. The CWS requested the Part 7 Task Force to revise the draft questionnaire taking
into account the issues listed above and present a new proposal for consideration at the
next session of the CWS. Delegations were invited to share their comments and
proposals regarding the questionnaire on IPPEs in the Part 7 Task Force Wiki by the end
of June 2017 and to actively participate in the Task Force’s discussion.

Agenda Item 17: Applicant name standardization

82. Discussions were based on documents CWS/5/14 and CWS/5/14 ADD. and the
presentations made by the Delegation of the Republic of Korea and the International Bureau.

83. The CWS noted the content of document CWS/5/14 and the Study on applicant name
standardization prepared by the International Bureau, as reproduced in the Annex thereto.

84. The CWS noted the content of document “Status report on Applicant Name
Standardization of IP5 Global Dossier Initiatives” presented by the Delegation of the Republic of
Korea, as reproduced in the Annex to document CWS/5/14 ADD.

85. The CWS recognized the relevance of applicant name standardization and agreed
to create a new Task, whose description would read:
“Envisaging developing a WIPO standard assisting Industrial Property Offices
(IPOs) in providing better “quality at source” in relation to applicant names,
i. conduct a survey on the use of the identifiers for applicants by IPOs and on
the problems, which might be associated with it; and
ii. prepare a proposal for future actions aimed at the standardization of applicant
names in IP documents and present it for consideration by the CWS.”

86. The CWS also agreed to establish a new Task Force (Name Standardization Task
Force) to handle this task and requested the Task Force:
(a) to prepare a questionnaire to carry out the survey on the use of the identifiers
for applicants by IPOs and present it for consideration by the CWS at its sixth
session; and
(b) to prepare, on the basis of the survey results, the proposal for further actions
and present it for consideration by the CWS at its seventh session to be held
in 2019.

87. The CWS suggested that the Task Force should discuss the objectives and scope of the
recommendations to be developed.
88. The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) and the International Bureau were
designated as co-leaders of the Name Standardization Task Force.

Agenda Item 18: Creation of a Task to prepare recommendations for web services on IP
information and documentation
89. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/15, which contained a proposal to create a
new Task to prepare recommendations for the web services on IP information and
documentation on the basis of the results of discussions by and the survey carried out within the
XML4IP Task Force.
90. The CWS noted the content of document CWS/5/15 and presentations by the Delegations
of Australia, the Russian Federation and the United States of America, the Representative of
UPOV and the International Bureau regarding their practices and plans on web services.
 CWS/5/22
page 12

91. Several delegations and representatives supported the abovementioned proposal; some
other delegations and representatives suggested that the CWS focus on its standardization
activities on IP information and documentation rather than IT standardization, as the
corresponding IT technology might rapidly evolve.

92. The CWS agreed to create a new Task, whose description would read “Prepare
recommendations for data exchange supporting machine to machine communications
focusing on:
i. message format, data structure and data dictionary in JavaScript Object Notation
(JSON) and/or XML; and

ii. naming conventions for Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) of resources.”

93. The CWS assigned the new Task to the XML4IP Task Force.

Agenda Item 19: Creation of a Task to prepare recommendations for national and regional
patent registers
94. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/16, which contained a proposal to create
a new Task in order to prepare recommendations for patent registers published by industrial
property offices.

95. Some delegations were of the opinion that the term “patent registers” might bring
confusion with respect to the scope of the proposed Task, as certain IPOs used the term to refer
to all patent information available in their internal IT systems, not only publicly available
information.

96. Following the discussion, the CWS agreed to create a new Task No. 52, whose
description would read:

“Survey on content and functionalities of systems for providing access to publicly

available patent information of industrial property offices, as well as future plans with
respect to their publication practices; prepare recommendations for systems for
providing access to publicly available patent information of industrial property
offices.”

97. After the agreement on the establishment of the said new Task, the CWS considered the
possibility to broaden the scope of the Task to cover systems for providing access to publicly
available information related to trademarks and industrial designs. Following the discussion, the
CWS agreed to limit the scope of the Task to the access to patent information only.

98. The CWS agreed that the survey should be focused on interactive systems used by
IPOs to provide public access to patent information rather than bulk delivery of the
corresponding data.

99. The CWS agreed to establish a new Task Force to handle the new Task and
requested the Secretariat to propose the name of the new Task Force to be in line with
the definition of the Task No. 52. The International Bureau was designated as the Task
Force Leader.

100. The CWS requested the established Task Force to take into account the knowledge
gathered during the maintenance of the Patent Register Portal and the results of the work
of the Legal Status Task Force.
 CWS/5/22
page 13

Agenda Item 20: Creation of a Task to establish requirements for design electronic visual
representations
101. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/17.

102. The Delegation of Australia presented its proposal to develop a new WIPO standard for
design electronic graphical views, as reproduced in the Annex to document CWS/5/17. The
proposal had wide and unanimous support.

103. The CWS agreed to create a new Task, whose description would read:
“Collect information about the requirements from industrial property offices and
customers; and prepare recommendations for electronic visual representations of
designs.”

104. The CWS also agreed to establish a new Task Force (Design Representation Task
Force) and designated IP Australia and the International Bureau as co-leaders of the new
Task Force.

Agenda Item 21: Report on Annual Technical Reports (ATRs)

105. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/18.

106. The CWS noted the report on ATRs prepared by the International Bureau, as reproduced
in document CWS/5/18, and encouraged IPOs to respond to the circulars C.CWS 84, C.CWS
85 and C.CWS 86 of April 13, 2017 and submit their ATRs for the year 2016.

107. The International Bureau noted a constant decrease in number of the ATRs submitted
every year and informed the CWS of its plan to collect more statistics. The CWS took note that
if the numbers continue decreasing, the International Bureau would present this issue for
consideration at the sixth session of the CWS.

108. The CWS was informed that ATRs contained useful information for the IP information user
community and that it would appreciate it if as many IPOs as practical participate in this activity.

Agenda Item 22: Report on the provision of technical advice and assistance for capacity
building to industrial property offices in connection with the mandate of the CWS
109. Discussions were based on document CWS/5/19.

110. The Delegation of Spain informed the CWS that it started working on defining possible
awareness raising activities on WIPO Standards in Latin America with funding from the Fund in
Trust (FIT/ES). The Delegation also informed the CWS that in April 2017 it received from the
Secretariat a specific training on WIPO Standards in the format “train-the-trainer”, which would
be used as a model for future trainings on WIPO Standards to be held in interested countries in
Latin America.

111. The CWS noted the need of further training and awareness raising activities, including
online courses, on WIPO Standards to be provided by the International Bureau to the IPOs,
especially in developing countries.

112. The CWS noted that the Secretariat would provide technical assistance and training
regarding WIPO Standards on demand and depending on the availability of resources; the
Secretariat would present a proposal regarding the online training courses on WIPO
Standards for consideration by the CWS at its sixth session.
 CWS/5/22
page 14

113. The CWS noted the report presented by the International Bureau on its activities
carried out in 2016 related to providing technical advice and assistance for capacity
building to IPOs, in particular, regarding the dissemination of IP standards information, as
reproduced in document CWS/5/19. The CWS also took note that document CWS/5/19
would serve as a basis of the relevant report to be presented to the WIPO General
Assembly to be held in October 2017, as it was requested at its 40th session held in
October 2011 (see paragraph 190 of document WO/GA/40/19).

Agenda Item 23: Consideration of the Work Program and Tasks List of the CWS
114. The CWS considered the List of Tasks reproduced in Annex I to document CWS/5/20 in
order to establish the work program of the CWS. The CWS noted the List of Tasks reproduced
in Annex I to the said document.

115. The CWS approved the List of Tasks, as presented in Annex I to document
CWS/5/20; the List of Tasks should be incorporated in the CWS work program once it is
updated to reflect the agreements reached by the CWS at this fifth session.

116. After updating the information regarding the Tasks that had been discussed during the
fifth session of the CWS, including the decisions under this agenda item 23, the status of Tasks
was as follows:

(a) Tasks considered completed at this session:

Task No. 30: Survey industrial property offices on application and priority
application numbers used.

(b) Tasks on which work remains to be done:

Task No. 44: Support the International Bureau by providing users’ requirements
and feedback on the ST.26 authoring and validation software tool;
Support the International Bureau in the consequential revision of
the PCT Administrative Instructions; and Prepare necessary
revisions of WIPO Standard ST.26 upon request by the CWS.

Task No. 47: Prepare a final proposal for the detailed events and a guidance
document with regard to patent legal status data; prepare a
recommendation for the exchange of legal status data on
trademarks and industrial designs by industrial property offices.

Task No. 51: Prepare and present for consideration at the sixth session of the
CWS to be held in 2018, Annex III “XML schema (XSD)” and
Annex IV “Data Type Definition (DTD)” to WIPO Standard ST.37
“Recommendation for an authority file of published patent
documents”.

(c) Tasks to ensure continuous maintenance of WIPO Standards:

Task No. 38: Ensure the necessary revisions and updates of WIPO
Standard ST.36.

Task No. 39: Ensure the necessary revisions and updates of WIPO
Standard ST.66.

Task No. 41: Ensure the necessary revisions and updates of WIPO
Standard ST.96.
 CWS/5/22
page 15

Task No. 42: Ensure the necessary revisions and updates of WIPO
Standard ST.86.

(d) Tasks of continuing activity and/or information nature:

Task No. 18: Identify areas for standardization relevant to the exchange of
machine-readable data on the basis of projects envisaged by such
bodies as the Five IP Offices (IP5), the Five Trademark
Offices (TM5), the Industrial Design 5 Forum (ID5), ISO, IEC and
other well-known industry standard-setting bodies.

Task No. 23: Monitor the inclusion, in databases, of information about the entry,
and, where applicable, the non-entry into the national (regional)
phase of published PCT international applications.

Task No. 24: Collect and publish Annual Technical Reports (ATRs) on Patent,
Trademark and Industrial Design Information Activities of the CWS
Members (ATR/PI, ATR/TM, ATR/ID).

Task No. 33: Ongoing revision of WIPO Standards.

Task No. 33/3: Ongoing revision of WIPO Standard ST.3.

Task No. 50: Ensure the necessary maintenance and update of surveys
published in Part 7 of the WIPO Handbook on Industrial Property
Information and Documentation.

(e) Tasks created at this session and on which work has not started:

Task No. 52: Survey on content and functionalities of systems for providing
access to publicly available patent information of industrial
property offices, as well as future plans with respect to their
publication practices; prepare recommendations for systems for
providing access to publicly available patent information of
industrial property offices.

Task No. 53: Develop XML schema components for geographical indications.

Task No. 54: Study the copyright orphan works data elements and naming
conventions and compare them in view of the proposal to extend
WIPO Standard ST.96; report the outcome of the study; and
present a proposal for consideration by the CWS to develop a data
dictionary and XML schemas for inclusion of copyright orphan
works in WIPO Standard ST.96.

Task No. 55: Envisaging developing a WIPO standard assisting Industrial

Property Offices (IPOs) in providing better “quality at source” in
relation to applicant names,
i. conduct a survey on the use of the identifiers for applicants by
IPOs and on the problems, which might be associated with it;
and

ii. prepare a proposal for future actions aimed at the

standardization of applicant names in IP documents and
present it for consideration by the CWS.
 CWS/5/22
page 16

Task No. 56: Prepare recommendations for data exchange supporting machine
to machine communications focusing on:
i. message format, data structure and data dictionary in JSON
and/or XML
ii. naming conventions for Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) of
resources.

Task No. 57: Collect information about the requirements from IP offices and
customers; and prepare recommendations for electronic visual
representations of designs.

(f) Task on which work has been held in abeyance:

Task No. 43: Prepare guidelines, for implementation by industrial property

offices, regarding paragraph numbering, long paragraphs, and
consistent rendering of patent documents.

Task No. 49: Prepare a recommendation for the electronic management of

motion or multimedia marks for adoption as a WIPO standard.

117. The Secretariat presented a proposal for the simplified CWS Work Program as
reproduced in Annex II to document CWS/5/20.

118. The CWS approved the proposal for the CWS Work Program Overview presented
by the Secretariat; and requested the Secretariat to publish the completed CWS Work
Program Overview on WIPO’s web site.

Agenda Item 24: Summary by the Chair

119. The Summary by the Chair was prepared and distributed for information purposes. The
CWS noted the Summary by the Chair.

Meetings of the CWS Task Forces

120. During this session, the following CWS Task Forces held informal meetings: Legal Status
Task Force, Sequence Listings Task Force, XML4IP and Authority File Task Forces. The Task
Force Leaders informed the CWS about the progress made regarding their respective tasks in
the said meetings.

Agenda Item 25: Closing of the session

121. The meeting was closed by the Chair on June 2, 2017.

Adoption of the report of the session

122. This report was adopted by the
participants to the fifth session of the
CWS via an e-forum.

[Annexes follow]
 CWS/5/22
ANNEX I

LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS/LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

I. ÉTATS MEMBRES/MEMBER STATES

(dans l’ordre alphabétique des noms français des États/
in the alphabetical order of the names in French of the States)

AFRIQUE DU SUD/SOUTH AFRICA

Malebane DINEO (Ms.), Team Leader, IP Officer, Department of Trade and Industry, Pretoria

ALLEMAGNE/GERMANY

Katja BRABEC (Ms.), Information Technology Strategic Planning and International

Coordination, German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), Munich

Thomas PLARRE, Examiner, German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), Munich

ARABIE SAOUDITE/SAUDI ARABIA

Saad ALHUDIBI, Head of Patent Information Unit, Saudi Patent Office King Abdullaziz City for
Science and Technology (KACST), Riyadh

Mohmmed ALJARPOO, General Administration of Trademarks, Ministry of Commerce and

Industry, Riyadh

Alyssa HZZA, The Board of Grievances, General Administration of Trademarks Ministry of

Commerce and Industry, Riyadh

ARGENTINE/ARGENTINA

María Inés RODRÍGUEZ (Sra.), Ministro, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

AUSTRALIE/AUSTRALIA

Sanjay KALRA, Chief Information Officer, Business and Information Management Solutions
Group, IP Australia Department of Industry, Canberra

Michael BURN, Director, International ICT Cooperation, IP Australia Department of Industry,

Canberra

AUTRICHE/AUSTRIA

Katharina FASTENBAUER (Ms.), Head of Patent Support and PCT, Deputy Vice President for
Technical Affairs, Patent Support and PCT, The Austrian Patent Office Federal Ministry for
Transport, Innovation and Technology, Vienna

BRÉSIL/BRAZIL

Fernando CASSIBI DE SOUZA, IP Researcher, National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI),

Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade, Rio de Janeiro

Caue OLIVEIRA FANHA, Secretary, Permanent Mission of Brazil to the WTO, Geneva
 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 2

CANADA

Jean-Charles DAOUST, Director, Investment and Program Management, Programs Branch,

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada ISED - Canadian Intellectual Property
Office (CIPO), Gatineau

Fréderique DELAPRÉE (Mme), première secrétaire, Mission permanente, Genève

CHILI/CHILE

Marcela PAÍVA (Sra.), Consejera, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

CHINE/CHINA

GE Fubin, Director, State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China (SIPO),
Beijing

DONG Xiaoling, Principal Staff Delegation, State Intellectual Property Office of the People's
Republic of China (SIPO), Beijing

CHEN Hui (Ms.), Clerk, State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China
(SIPO), Beijing

COLOMBIE/COLOMBIA

Daniela Carolina PEREZ MAHECHA (Sra.), Pasante, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

COSTA RICA

Agustin MELÉNDEZ GARCÍA, Sub Director, Registro de la Propiedad Industrial, Registro

Nacional Ministerio de Justicia y Paz, San José

CÔTE D'IVOIRE

Kumou MANKONGA, premier secrétaire, Mission permanente, Genève

EL SALVADOR

Katia CARBALLO (Sra.), Ministra Consejera, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

EMIRATS ARABES UNIS/UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Jumah ALALI, Advisor, GCC, Riyadh

Shaima AL-AKEL (Ms.), International Organizations Executive, Office of the United Arab
Emirates to the World Trade Organization, Geneva

ESPAGNE/SPAIN

Carlos ALBERT GARCÍA, Técnico de Sistemas, División Tecnología de la Información,

Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo Oficina Española de Patentes y Marcas (OEPM),
Madrid
 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 3

ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE/UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Arti SHAH (Ms.), Manager, International Projects, United States Department of Commerce,
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Alexandria

Tyle AUDUONG (Ms.), Supervisor, Trademark Business Operations Specialist, United States
Department of Commerce, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Alexandria

Susan WOLSKI (Ms.), PCT Special Programs Examiner, International Patent Legal
Administration, United States Department of Commerce, United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO), Alexandria

Narith TITH, Information Technology Specialist, Office of The Chief Technology Officer, United
States Department of Commerce, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO),
Alexandria

Kristine SCHLEGELMILCH (Ms.), IP Attaché, Permanent Mission, Geneva

EX-RÉPUBLIQUE YOUGOSLAVE DE MACÉDOINE (L')/THE FORMER YUGOSLAV

REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

Mite KOSTOV, Deputy Director, Trademark Department, State Office of Industrial Property
(SOIP), Skopje

Cveta JAKIMOSKA (Ms.), Advisor, Trademark Department, State Office of Industrial Property
(SOIP), Skopje

FÉDÉRATION DE RUSSIE/RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Alexander CHEREPANOV, Specialist, Multilateral Cooperation Division, International

Cooperation Department, Federal Service for Intellectual Property (ROSPATENT), Moscow

Fedor VOSTRIKOV, Head of IT Division, Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS), Federal
Service for Intellectual Property (ROSPATENT), Moscow

Yury ZONTOV, Specialist, IT Division, Federal Institute of Industrial Property (FIPS), Federal
Service for Intellectual Property (ROSPATENT), Moscow

FRANCE

Sébastien GRILLOT, architecte de données, DSI, Institut national de la propriété industrielle

(INPI), Courbevoie

GÉORGIE/GEORGIA

Ana GOBECHIA (Ms.), Head, International Affairs Unit, National Intellectual Property Center of
Georgia (SAKPATENTI), Mtskheta

HONGRIE (LA)/HUNGARY

Gyöngyi SZILVITZKY (Ms.), Head, Receiving and Official Publication Section, Hungarian
Intellectual Property Office (HIPO), Budapest
 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 4

INDE/INDIA

Sameer Kumar SWARUP, Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs, Office of the Controller-
General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion,
Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, New Delhi

INDONÉSIE/INDONESIA

Yasmon YASMON, Director, Information Technology of IP, Directorate of Information

Technology of IP, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Directorate General of Intellectual
Property, Jakarta

Maman KUSMANA, Deputy Director, IT Infrastructure Support, Directorate of Information

Technology of IP, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Directorate General of Intellectual
Property, Jakarta

IRAN (RÉPUBLIQUE ISLAMIQUE D')/IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF)

Reza DEHGHANI, First Secretary, Permanent Mission, Geneva

ITALIE/ITALY

Cristiano DI CARLO, IT Coordinator, Italian Patent and Trademark Office Directorate General of
Combating Counterfeiting Ministry of Economic Development (UIBM), Rome

Mattia MORALE, Intern, Permanent Mission, Geneva

JAPON/JAPAN

Hiroshi ARAI, Deputy Director, Information Systems Division, Japan Patent Office (JPO), Tokyo

Kei KAWAKAMI, Deputy Director, Information Systems Division, Japan Patent Office (JPO),
Tokyo

Masataka SAITO, Deputy Director, Administrative Affairs Division, Japan Patent Office (JPO),
Tokyo

KUWAIT

Abdual Aziz, Commercial Attaché, Permanent Mission, Geneva

LITUANIE/LITHUANIA

Eglé LEVICKIENĖ (Ms.), Chief Officer, Industrial Property Information Division, State Patent
Bureau of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius

Renata RINKAUSKIENE (Ms.), Counseller, Permanent Mission, Geneva

 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 5

MEXIQUE/MEXICO

Ricardo GALLEGOS MATHEY, Coordinador Departamental de Asuntos Multilaterales,

Dirección General de Relaciones Internacionales, Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial
(IMPI), México

María del Pilar ESCOBAR BAUTISTA (Sra.), Consejera, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

Magali ESQUINCA GUZMAN (Sra.), Asistente, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

PANAMA

Alfredo SUESCUM, Embajador, Representante Permanente, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

PHILIPPINES

Ernesto VILLANUEVA, Information Technology Officer III, Intellectual Property Office of the
Philippines (IPOPHIL), Taguig City

RÉPUBLIQUE DE CORÉE/REPUBLIC OF KOREA

LEE Jumi (Ms.), Deputy Director, Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), Daejeon

LEE Seokhee, Assistant Deputy Director, Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), Daejeon

JUNG Dae Soon, IP Attaché, Counsellor, Permanent Mission, Geneva

RÉPUBLIQUE TCHÈQUE/CZECH REPUBLIC

Michal VERNER, Deputy Director, Patent Information Department, Industrial Property Office,
Prague

ROUMANIE/ROMANIA

Elena-Elvira MARIN (Ms.), Head, National Trademarks Department, Romanian State Office for
Inventions and Trademarks (OSIM), Bucharest

Mariana HAHUE (Ms.), Expert, Public Relations, Romanian State Office for Inventions and
Trademarks (OSIM), Bucharest

ROYAUME-UNI/UNITED KINGDOM

Julie DALTREY (Ms.), Data Architect, Intellectual Property Office Information Centre, Newport

Andrew SADLER, Senior Policy Advisor, Copyright and Enforcement Directorate, Intellectual
Property Office Information Centre, Cwmbran

SUÈDE/SWEDEN

Åsa VIKEN (Ms.), Operations Development Officer, IT Department, Swedish Patent and
Registration Office (PRV), Stockholm

THAÏLANDE/THAILAND

Navarat TANKAMALAS (Ms.), Minister Counselor, Permanent Mission, Geneva

 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 6

UKRAINE

Artem KONONENKO, Chief Expert, Patent Documentation and Standardization Division,

Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine, State Intellectual Property Service of
Ukraine, State Enterprise "Ukrainian Intellectual Property Institute" (Ukrpatent), Kyiv

VENEZUELA (RÉPUBLIQUE BOLIVARIENNE DU)/VENEZUELA (BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC

OF)
Yazid Milagros CORDOVA OLIVARES (Sra.), Coordinadora de Asuntos Económicos
Internacionales, Oficina de Asuntos Multilaterales y de Integración, Ministerio de Relaciones
Exteriores, Caracas

Genoveva CAMPOS DE MAZZONE (Sra.), Consejero, Misión Permanente, Ginebra

II. ORGANISATIONS INTERNATIONALES

INTERGOUVERNEMENTALES/INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS

OFFICE DES BREVETS DU CONSEIL DE COOPÉRATION DES ÉTATS ARABES DU

GOLFE (CCG)/PATENT OFFICE OF THE COOPERATION COUNCIL FOR THE ARAB
STATES OF THE GULF (GCC PATENT OFFICE)

Jumah ALALI, Advisor, Riyadh

Abdulrahman ALMOHAWES, Head, Information Technology Department, Riyadh

ORGANISATION AFRICAINE DE LA PROPRIÉTÉ INTELLECTUELLE (OAPI)/AFRICAN

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION (OAPI)

Issoufou KABORE, examinateur de brevets, chimie, Yaounde

ORGANISATION EURASIENNE DES BREVETS (OEAB)/EURASIAN PATENT

ORGANIZATION (EAPO)

Andrey SEKRETOV, Director, International Relations Department, Eurasian Patent Office

(EAPO), Moscow

Yury AMELKIN, Chief Specialist, Patent Information and Automation Department, Eurasian
Patent Office (EAPO), Moscow

ORGANISATION EUROPÉENNE DES BREVETS (OEB)/EUROPEAN PATENT

ORGANISATION (EPO)

Patrick LE GONIDEC, Administrator Electronic Publication and Dissemination, Vienna

Fernando FERREIRA, Data Standards Coordinator, Information Management, Rijswijk

UNION EUROPÉENNE (UE)/EUROPEAN UNION (EU)

Alexandre TRAN, IT Expert, Digital Transformation Department (DTD), European Union

Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Alicante

ORGANISATION RÉGIONALE AFRICAINE DE LA PROPRIÉTÉ INTELLECTUELLE

(ARIPO)/AFRICAN REGIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION (ARIPO)

Flora Kokwihyukya MPANJU (Ms.), Head, Search and Substantive Examination, Intellectual
Property Department, Harare
 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 7

UNION INTERNATIONALE POUR LA PROTECTION DES OBTENTIONS VÉGÉTALES

(UPOV)/INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW VARIETIES OF PLANTS
(UPOV)

Hend MADHOUR (Ms.), Data Modeler and Business Analyst, Geneva

III. ORGANISATIONS NON GOUVERNEMENTALES/NON-GOVERNMENTAL

ORGANIZATIONS

CONFEDERACY OF PATENT INFORMATION USER GROUPS (CEPIUG)

Guido MORADEI, Delegate, Varese

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE LA VIDÉO (IFV)/INTERNATIONAL VIDEO

FEDERATION (IVF)

Benoît MULLER, Consultant, Geneva

Marie ARBACHE (Mme), stagiaire, Genève

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DES ASSOCIATIONS DES INVENTEURS

(IFIA)/INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF INVENTORS' ASSOCIATIONS (IFIA)

Shafaghi MASOUD, Strategic Planning and Coordination Manager, Geneva

Arman YOUSEFIAN, Strategic Planning and Coordination Manager Assistant, Geneva

PATENT INFORMATION USERS GROUP (PIUG)

Stephen ADAMS, Vice Chair, Roche

IV. BUREAU/OFFICERS

Président/Chair: Katja BRABEC (Mme/Ms) (ALLEMAGNE/GERMANY)

Vice-présidents/Vice-Chairs: Alfredo SUESCUM (PANAMA)

Secrétaire/Secretary: Young-Woo YUN (OMPI/WIPO)

 CWS/5/22
Annex I, page 8

V. BUREAU INTERNATIONAL DE L’ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA PROPRIÉTÉ

INTELLECTUELLE (OMPI)/INTERNATIONAL BUREAU OF THE WORLD
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION (WIPO)

Francis GURRY, directeur général/Director General

Yo TAKAGI, sous-directeur général du Secteur de l’infrastructure mondiale/Assistant Director

General, Global Infrastructure Sector

Kunihiko FUSHIMI, directeur de la Division des classifications internationales et des normes,

Secteur de l’infrastructure mondiale/Director, International Classifications and Standards
Division, Global Infrastructure Sector

Young-Woo YUN, chef, Section des normes, Division des classifications internationales et des
normes, Secteur de l’infrastructure mondiale/Head, Standards Section, International
Classifications and Standards Division, Global Infrastructure Sector

Anna GRASCHENKOVA (Mme/Ms.), administratrice chargée de l’information en matière de

propriété industrielle de la Section des normes, Division des classifications internationales et
des normes, Secteur de l’infrastructure mondiale/Industrial Property Information Officer,
Standards Section, International Classifications and Standards Division, Global Infrastructure
Sector

[Annex II follows]
 CWS/5/22
ANNEX II

AGENDA

Document prepared by the Secretariat

1. Opening of the fifth session

2. Election of the Chair and two Vice-Chairs

3. Adoption of the agenda

See present document.

4. Report on the survey on the use of WIPO Standards

See document CWS/5/2.

5. Decision of the 48th session of the WIPO General Assembly in relation to the CWS,
including Development Agenda matters 1
See document CWS/5/3.

6. Extension of WIPO Standard ST.96 to incorporate eXtensible Markup Language (XML)

schema for orphan works and geographical indications
See document CWS/5/4.

7. Report on Task No. 41 by the XML4IP Task Force

See document CWS/5/5.

8. Revision of WIPO Standard ST.26

See document CWS/5/6.

9. Recommendations for the transition provision from WIPO Standard ST.25 to ST.26
See documents CWS/5/7 REV.1 and CWS/5/7 REV.1 ADD.

10. Presentation on the development of WIPO ST.26 software tool

11. New WIPO standard for the exchange of patent legal status data by industrial property
offices
See document CWS/5/8 REV.1.

12. New WIPO standard for an authority file of patent documents published by a patent office
See document CWS/5/9.

13. Report on the preparation of a new WIPO standard for the electronic management of
motion and multimedia marks
See document CWS/5/10.

14. Report on Task No. 50 by the Part 7 Task Force

See document CWS/5/11.

15. Report on the survey on application and priority application numbering systems used by
industrial property offices in the past
See document CWS/5/12.

16. Questionnaire on industrial property protection extensions (IPPEs)

See document CWS/5/13.
1
This agenda item is without prejudice to the Members' positions on a question as to whether the CWS is relevant to
Development Agenda coordination mechanism.
 CWS/5/22
Annex II, page 2

17. Applicant name standardization

See documents CWS/5/14 and CWS/5/14 ADD.

18. Creation of a Task to prepare recommendations for web services on IP information and
documentation
See document CWS/5/15.

19. Creation of a Task to prepare recommendations for national and regional patent registers
See document CWS/5/16.

20. Creation of a Task to establish requirements for design electronic visual representations
See document CWS/5/17.

21. Report on Annual Technical Reports (ATRs)

See document CWS/5/18.

22. Report by the International Bureau on the provision of technical advice and assistance for
capacity building to industrial property offices in connection with the mandate of the CWS
See document CWS/5/19.

23. Consideration of the Work Program and Tasks List of the CWS
See document CWS/5/20.

24. Summary by the Chair

25. Closing of the session

[End of Annex II and of document]