Arquivos do Mês: December 2025

On December 16, Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice (STJ) confirmed the position of the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) against extending the term of patent protection beyond the statutory limit.

In a decision issued by the 4th Panel of the STJ, under the rapporteurship of Justice Maria Isabel Gallotti, the Court denied the request to extend the patent term related to semaglutide, a compound used in treatments for type 2 diabetes and obesity.

The ruling aligns with the precedent set by Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) in Direct Action of Unconstitutionality No. 5,529, which declared unconstitutional the automatic extension of patent terms and established that patent protection in Brazil is limited to 20 years from the filing date.

By reaffirming this interpretation, the STJ reinforces legal certainty and regulatory predictability within Brazil’s patent system (key elements for innovation-driven industries, particularly pharmaceuticals and life sciences).

According to the BPTO, the Institute will continue to act, through its Federal Attorney’s Office and Brazil’s Office of the Attorney General, to preserve the stability and consistency of the national patent framework.

The Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) has announced that, as of January 1, 2026, it will no longer accept requests for expedited examination (fast-track and PPH) for patent applications whose main classification is H04 (Electric Communication Technique).

This restriction will apply to all expedited examination modalities, with limited exceptions for specific categories only (elderly applicants, applicants with disabilities, applicants with serious illnesses, and Brazilian startups).

Exceptionally High Demand for H04

In 2025, on both occasions when the BPTO opened PPH slots for the H04 classification (Q2 and Q4), the available quota was fully exhausted in less than 48 hours, clearly demonstrating the extremely high demand in this technical field.

Impact in 2026

As of 2026, the limitation applicable to H04 will also extend to most fast-track programs, significantly reducing the options available to accelerate the examination of such applications in Brazil.

In practical terms, what alternatives remain for H04 applications?

For applications classified under H04, there are essentially two viable strategies:

1. Request fast-track examination still in 2025, where applicable (noting that, for PPH, the Q4 slots have already been fully used).
2. Request examination as early as possible: under the current BPTO rules, applications are examined according to the date on which examination is requested, making an early request a strategically relevant factor.

Our alert

For portfolios within this classification, timing has become critical. Delaying strategic decisions may, in practical terms, result in additional years of waiting for substantive examination.

Tavares Legal IP Expertise is closely monitoring these developments and remains available to assess, on a case-by-case basis, the most appropriate strategy for applications classified under H04.

For further information or a strategic review of your portfolio, please contact: patents@tavaresoffice.com.br

A study commissioned by Movimento Brasil pela Inovação (Brazil Movement for Innovation) and conducted by Nexus Institute reveals that Brazilians broadly recognize the importance of innovation, patents, and sustained investment in science as key drivers of technological development and healthcare progress.

According to the survey, 83% of respondents believe that the future of healthcare in Brazil depends directly on the pharmaceutical industry’s investment in research and innovation. Despite this perception, awareness remains limited: only one in four Brazilians says they understand how intellectual property rules work in the country.

When informed about the role of patents in enabling technological innovation, public support increases significantly. Approximately 59% support the 20-year patent protection period once they understand its importance in making high-risk, long-term R&D investments viable.

Regulatory efficiency also emerged as a significant concern. Eighty percent of respondents believe that slow and bureaucratic patent registration processes may negatively affect the availability of new medicines in Brazil, highlighting the perceived impact of delays on public health.

The study further explored perceptions regarding changes to patent protection terms:

• 63% believe shortening patent terms could drive healthcare companies out of Brazil;
• 61% say reducing the 20-year protection period discourages R&D for innovative medicines;
• 59% recognize that shorter patent terms reduce access to innovative treatments;
• 63% agree that when patent terms are respected, new treatments reach the population more quickly.

The survey was conducted among 2,005 face-to-face interviews with individuals aged 18 and over across all 27 Brazilian states, between November 14 and 18, 2025. The sample was controlled by gender, age, education level, region, and municipality profile.

The findings reinforce the strategic role of patents in fostering innovation, attracting investment, and advancing technologies that directly impact society.

The Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) obtained a favorable decision from the Federal Court in a lawsuit against two Brazilian private companies: CONPPI – Gestão em Propriedade Industrial Ltda. and Pública Gestão em Negócios Empresariais Ltda. After identifying irregular practices involving the unauthorized use of the BPTO’s name, acronym, and institutional identity.

According to the BPTO, these companies sent electronic messages and bank slips designed to resemble official communications, and improperly accessed administrative proceedings by registering themselves as “interested third parties” to collect user data. The reports were submitted through the BPTO Ombudsman.

Recognizing the risk of harm to the Institute’s reputation and to users of the IP system, the Court granted urgent relief prohibiting the companies from:

• using any identifier associated with the BPTO,
• offering services that fall under the Institute’s exclusive authority,
• and accessing administrative files to gather data.

Failure to comply may result in a daily fine of BRL 10,000 per violation. The case is pending before the 13th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo (Case No. 5033783-32.2025.4.03.6100).

On Sunday (30), an Argentine court ordered the shutdown of 22 illegal streaming applications, many of which were widely used in Brazil, including BTV, Red Play, and Blue TV. This action marks the second phase of a regional crackdown on platforms distributing copyrighted content without authorization. Earlier in November, 14 other services had already been taken offline.

According to Alianza, the association that combats audiovisual piracy in Latin America, more than 2 million users paid monthly fees to access these platforms, which operated mainly through TV boxes and IPTV devices. Although such devices are allowed in Brazil, they must be certified by Anatel, the national telecommunications regulator.

Following the shutdown, many users publicly reported service interruptions on consumer complaint platforms. Brazilian consumer protection authorities clarified that individuals who knowingly subscribe to illegal services forfeit their consumer rights, as the companies behind such platforms are often not legally registered entities.

This decision is unrelated to Brazil’s Operation 404, a nationwide initiative that recently blocked 535 websites and one streaming app offering pirated content. The actions in Argentina stem from an investigation launched in 2024, following Alianza’s submission of evidence to the Cybercrime Unit of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Buenos Aires.

On November 28, 2025, the BPTO released an update to its Trademark Manual, introducing important guidelines on acquired distinctiveness and on the recently established modality of opposition with restricted allegations, based on Article 124, XIX, of the Brazilian Industrial Property Law.

The modifications reflect Ordinance BPTO/PR No. 15/2025, which defined the concept of acquired distinctiveness and outlined the procedures, deadlines, and required documents for submitting a request for analysis. These guidelines were previously discussed with the public during the 2024–2025 Public Consultation, with official responses now available.

The update also includes instructions on the service “Opposition with restriction of allegations by class” (code 3022), created by Ordinance BPTO/PR No. 36/2025. This new service aims to streamline the opposition stage, ensuring greater procedural efficiency and cost reduction for users.

These improvements are part of BPTO’s 2025 Action Plan, aligned with Strategic Projects P1.15 – Opposition 2.0 and P1.08 – Acquired Distinctiveness and Non-Traditional Marks.

The complete list of updates is available in the “Updates” section of the Trademark Manual.