The IP Factor

Dr Meir Noam

Dr Meir Noam, the Israel Commissioner of Patents has announced his retirement from office, effective as of December 31, 2010.

The move came as no surprise, since it is Israel government policy to cap the amount of time civil servants can hold senior level positions, such as that of Commissioner of Patents. Dr Noam took on the job in the summer of 2002, after it had been vacant for several months.

Soon after he assumed the position, the patent office had to make an unexpected move due to structural faults in the building where it was located. The problems weren’t confined to bricks and mortar. He also inherited a small number of aging patent examiners, mostly past retirement age. The level of examination was not very high, and the pendency periods were inordinately long.

In the 7 1/2 years since taking the helm, Dr Noam managed to recruit a large number of young Examiners, to computerize the patent office, and to relocate to a permanent building in the Malcha High Tech Park where the office now has court rooms for hearings and a conference hall.

Under his leadership, the Israel Patent Office has rebranded itself as the Patent Agency, and has become a closed government agency, able to use filing and other fees to pay staff salaries. Israel has joined the Madrid Protocol for Trademarks.

The Israel Patent Office has been approved as an International Search Authority for PCT applications and has been invited to join the Patent Super Highway, and the patent department has received ISO 9000 quality certification.

In a series of Patent Office Circulars Dr Noam has brought about procedural reform and in a number of well-reasoned decisions has indicated patent office policy in various areas.

The name Meir in Hebrew means to enlighten or illuminate, and Noam means pleasant, and Dr Meir Noam has in fact enlightened the profession while being pleasant to patent office professionals.

As a blogger, reporting developments and rulings issued by the Patent Office, I have been occasionally critical of some policies and decisions. Nevertheless, it must be stated that on the whole his rulings have been well-reasoned and balanced.

In my view he may have occasionally exceeded the authority of his position by making decisions that would have been best decided by the Minister of Justice or by Knesset legislation. Cases in point include recognizing gene strings per se as being patentable subject matter and ruling that if published designs in the databases of other patent offices are accessible over the Internet, this is equivalent to them being published in Israel and thus lacking local novelty.

Ironically, Dr Noam was recently criticized by MK David Rotem, Chairman of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee for exceeding his authority in deciding not to publish basic filing details of patent applications in the Official Gazette and publishing them instead on the Internet in the database of the Israel Patent Office. The criticism centered around the Patent Office collecting the publication fee from all applicants for four years despite not publishing on paper. That particular efficiency measure was ecological, sensible, saved time and made the data more readily accessible. Nevertheless, it sparked a class action and resulted in the Ministry of Justice announcing that they intend to refund the fees paid. It is not clear how this will be implemented. It is a shame that this development and public criticism came at the end of a remarkable term of office.

Dr Noam’s tenure as Commissioner of Patents will be remembered for modernizing and upgrading the Patent Office and for generally bringing the Israel patent process into the 21st century. Whoever replaces him will have a tough act to follow.