Trademark registrations rose 284% in a single year and patent grants 55%, while filings fell slightly. That combination — disposal surging while intake dipped — is what a backlog being worked through looks like.
The overall picture
Total applications filed in 2016–17 were 3,55,393, a decrease of 0.37% on the previous year. Patents, designs and trademarks fell; GI and copyright rose.
Revenue was ₹608.31 crore, about 4% higher than the previous year, against expenditure of ₹129.8 crore.
Patents
45,444 filed, 30,271 disposed, 9,847 granted. Filings down 3.2%; grants up 55.3%. Online filing reached 90%.
Foreign applicants: the US led with 8,981, followed by Japan with 3,399. Qualcomm filed the most of any foreign company (1,840), then Samsung Electronics (706). 8,532 foreign patents were granted.
Domestic: Maharashtra first with 3,513, Tamil Nadu second with 2,003, Delhi third with 1,066. No applications at all from Daman and Diu, Meghalaya or Sikkim. The IITs collectively led Indian applicants with 400; CSIR third with 225; BHEL fifth with 174. Of 1,315 patents granted to Indian applicants, CSIR received the most (104), then DRDO (80).
By field: most applications in electrical, electronics and related subjects (19,640); fewest in traditional knowledge (84).
Trademarks
2,78,170 filed, 5,32,230 examined, 2,50,070 registered, 2,90,444 disposed. Examination up 98.7%; registrations up 284.5%. Online filing reached 80%.
Those two figures are the story of the year. Examination nearly doubling and registrations nearly quadrupling reflects a Registry finally clearing accumulated work — and it is the direct measurable result of the reforms below.
Foreign: 11,440 applications, the US leading with 3,792 and China second with 1,360. WIPO notified 33,788 international registrations designating India.
Domestic: 2,66,730 applications. The Delhi branch received the most (1,04,249); Maharashtra led the states with 63,070, Delhi second with 51,563.
By class: most applications in Class 5 — pharmaceuticals, veterinary and sanitary substances — at 40,578.
Designs
10,213 filed, 11,940 examined, 8,276 registered, 8,332 disposed. Pendency of examination fell from 8 months in March 2016 to one month in March 2017 — the sharpest single improvement in the report.
Foreign: 3,921 applications, the US first with 792 and Japan second with 508; Samsung led companies with 180 applications.
Domestic: 6,292 applications, Maharashtra first with 1,659 and Delhi second with 1,013. The leading Indian applicant was Sabyasachi Couture with 308 applications — a useful illustration that design registration is being used seriously in fashion.
GI, copyright and layout designs
GI: 32 applications and 1,548 authorised user applications, of which 1,466 registered; 34 GIs registered.
Copyright: 16,617 applications received, 16,584 examined, with discrepancies communicated in 12,988. The Copyright Office began publishing applications received each month, with online status tracking.
Layout designs: e-filing was integrated into the revamped SICLDR website, and the journal published online.
The reforms behind the numbers
The report set out ten categories of reform, of which the substantive ones were:
- Automation — auto-allocation of examination requests, examination reports and certificates by email, SMS alerts, and mandatory online filing for patent agents.
- Simplification — the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 cutting forms from 74 to eight, with a single application form for all types, and removal of extensions for filing affidavits and evidence.
- Startups — 80% fee concession for patents and 50% for trademarks, plus expedited examination for startup patent applications.
- E-filing incentive — a 10% fee concession extended to trademarks, in line with patents and designs.
- Prosecution — video conference hearings, and adjournments limited to two of no more than thirty days each.
- Quality and access — a quality control system for examination reports, a redesigned website with real-time IP data, and full-text search.
What the report did not fix
The reforms contributed to the National IPR Policy’s objective, but the shortcomings were real and worth recording.
Examination quality remained mediocre despite the quality control system, with a number of flawed reports. Transparency deserved criticism — the Patent Office alone received 164 RTI requests, and while action was said to have been taken on all, in practice many RTI requests went unanswered. Timely responses to RTI requests are the minimum a public registry owes.
Manpower was the structural problem. Only one patent agent was registered in the year, and there was no permanent staff for the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout Design Registry — a registry running with no dedicated personnel.
Since then: the direction held. Pendency across trademarks and patents continued to fall through subsequent years, examiner recruitment expanded substantially, and Indian patent filings later grew sharply — with domestic filings eventually overtaking foreign ones, a reversal of the position shown in this report.
The takeaways
- Registrations surged as backlogs cleared — trademarks up 284%, patent grants up 55%.
- Design pendency fell from eight months to one in a single year.
- The 2017 Rules cut trademark forms from 74 to eight.
- Quality, transparency and staffing remained the unresolved problems.
Frequently asked questions
How many patents did India grant in 2016–17? 9,847, an increase of 55.3% over the previous year, from 45,444 applications filed.
What fee concessions apply to startups? An 80% concession for patents and 50% for trademarks, along with expedited examination for startup patent applications.
Which trademark class receives the most applications in India? Class 5 — pharmaceuticals, veterinary and sanitary substances — with 40,578 applications in 2016–17.
What were the main criticisms of the IP Office? Mediocre examination quality despite quality control, poor responsiveness to RTI requests, and inadequate staffing, including no permanent staff for the layout design registry.