直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Prosecution First Blog

Industrial Designs Get Their Own Club: USPTO Hosts the Inaugural ID5 Meeting

December 10, 2015

Authored and Edited by Elizabeth D. Ferrill; Adriana L. Burgy

As with the TM5 and the IP5 before them, the five largest offices that issue design rights have joined together as the Industrial Design 5, also known as the ID5.  On December 3 and 4, 2015, the USPTO hosted the first meeting along with representatives from the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) (part of the European Union), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China (SIPO).  Collectively, these five offices issue more than 80% of the world’s industrial design rights, including both design patents and design registrations.  Representatives from WIPO also participated as Observers.  The offices released an Agreed Statement on December 3 outlining the framework for ID5.

From this meeting, ID5 agreed to pursue thirteen different projects in furtherance of the goal of developing shared procedures between the Offices.  For instance, ID5 plans to pursue projects involving the compilation of statistics, creating a catalog of design protection eligibility, and investigating electronic priority document exchange.  Moreover, KIPO agreed to host an ID5 website, modeled after the TM5 website that it currently hosts.  OHIM also announced that it plans to expand its DesignView database to include design filings from all ID5 offices.  ID5 also plans to undertake a comparative study of priority requirements, grace periods, and the acceptability of partial designs between the five Offices.  Finally, ID5 plans to discuss the protection of emerging designs, including static, animated, and 3D graphical user interfaces.

At the invited User’s Group on December 4, the Office representatives reported that the first meeting had a promising spirit of cooperation.  In that same spirit, the Users’ representatives stated that they generally appreciated the efforts of the ID5 offices to work towards cataloging the differences between office practices and working towards eventual harmonization, especially in those areas that often “trap” unsuspecting applicants and may result in the unintended loss of rights.

The next ID5 meeting will be hosted in Fall 2016 by SIPO in Beijing, China, around the same time as the TM5 meeting.

 

Tags

patent application, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email
Adriana L. Burgy
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4345
Email

Copyright © 2015 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Claim Disclaimer Derails Instituted IPR in Freightcar America

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

Seminar

IP Strategy at the Crossroads: Technology, Enforcement, and Contracts

May 15, 2026

Taipei

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP