Trade Mark Specification and Classification for the Engineering Sector in Malaysia: An Exhaustive Guide to the Nice Classification and Specification Drafting

 

Trade Mark Specification and Classification for the Engineering Sector in Malaysia: An Exhaustive Guide to the Nice Classification and Specification Drafting

1. Introduction to the Framework of Malaysian Trademarks

The landscape of intellectual property protection in Malaysia underwent a profound and historical transformation with the enactment of the Trademarks Act 2019 (Act 815), which received Royal Assent on November 22, 2019, and formally replaced the legacy Trade Marks Act 1976. This sweeping legislative overhaul modernized the nation's trademark regime, aligning domestic statutes with global commercial standards and facilitating Malaysia's highly anticipated accession to the Madrid Protocol.

This article provides an analysis of the trademark classification system as it applies to the engineering sector within the jurisdiction of the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO). It delineates the structural nuances of the international classification taxonomy, explores the stringent statutory requirements of MyIPO regarding the precise specification of goods and services, and details the profound taxonomic shifts introduced by the Nice Classification.

2. The Architecture and Evolution of the Nice Classification System

The classification of goods and services in Malaysia is governed by an internationally harmonized system known as the International (Nice) Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks. This taxonomy was established by a multilateral treaty concluded at the Nice Diplomatic Conference on June 15, 1957, subsequently revised at Stockholm in 1967 and Geneva in 1977, and is currently administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The countries party to the Nice Agreement constitute a Special Union within the framework of the Paris Union for the Protection of Industrial Property, and the system is utilized by over 150 national and regional IP offices globally, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), and MyIPO.

Prior to the formal registration of a trademark, every good or service intended to be covered by the application must be classified into its appropriate class according to this controlling system. The Nice Classification simplifies and standardizes the trademark application process, ensuring that goods and services are classified uniformly across disparate jurisdictions, thereby facilitating international trademark searches and multi-jurisdictional filings under the Madrid Protocol.

The Structural Components of the Taxonomy

The Nice Classification divides the entirety of global commerce into 45 distinct classes. Classes 1 through 34 are dedicated to physical goods, while Classes 35 through 45 are dedicated to services.

3. Statutory Requirements and Specification Drafting at MyIPO

The process of defining the scope of trademark protection requires an exacting balance between the commercial objective of achieving maximum market exclusivity and the stringent statutory requirements for linguistic clarity, precision, and demonstrable commercial justification. The Trademarks Act 2019 and the accompanying Trademarks Regulations 2019 impose rigid boundaries on how goods and services must be articulated during the application process.

The Prohibition of Ambiguity: The "Articles" and "Machinery" Principle

MyIPO maintains uncompromising guidelines regarding the semantic clarity of goods and services specifications. Broad, indeterminate categories that fail to notify the public and competitors of the exact nature of the commercial monopoly are systematically rejected during substantive examination.

A foundational interpretative principle within MyIPO's examination framework involves the use of generic nouns such as "articles," "systems," or "machinery." The registry explicitly dictates that specifications containing the word "articles" must be clearly and unequivocally qualified by their function, material, or specific industry application. For example, submitting an application specifying merely "articles of wood" in Class 19 is categorically unacceptable. The examiner will raise an immediate objection, mandating that the applicant further qualify the description to indicate the intended commercial goods, such as "articles of wood for building purposes". Conversely, descriptions that inherently possess definitive boundaries by virtue of the preceding adjective, such as "jewellery articles" in Class 14 or "thermal insulating articles" in Class 17, are accepted without objection.

This principle applies directly to the engineering sector. Claiming broad protection for generic terms like "machinery" or "industrial equipment" in Class 7 is a pervasive error that will trigger an Office Action. Applicants often utilize vague terms under the mistaken belief that ambiguity provides broader protection; however, the registry requires high specificity to accurately assess cross-class conflicts. The functional application or the specific industry must be defined, resulting in acceptable phraseology such as "agricultural tractors," "industrial excavators," or "machine tools for metalworking". As established in foundational trademark jurisprudence, words of ordinary English usage cannot be monopolized without distinct context; attempting to claim ownership over the mere word "machinery" would inappropriately appropriate common language from the public domain.

Regulation 11(4): The Danger of Over-Specification

A pervasive and highly dangerous misconception in trademark prosecution strategy is the belief that an applicant should propose claiming every theoretically possible good or service within a particular class to grant the client the "broadest protection possible". This exhaustive approach is not merely procedurally risky; it is legally precarious and often counter to the client's best interests in Malaysia.

Under Regulation 11(4) of the Trademarks Regulations 2019, MyIPO possesses the statutory authority to police over-specification. The regulation stipulates that in the case of an application for registration in respect of all the goods or services included in a particular class, or of an excessively large variety of goods or services, the Registrar may formally refuse the application. The Registrar will only permit such broad specifications if satisfied that the sweeping claim is genuinely "justified by the use of the trademark which the applicant has made, or intends to make if and when the trademark is registered".

Consequently, adopting a broad, unqualified term in the specifications—such as "retail or wholesale services" in Class 35—will highly likely attract a formality objection. The applicant will be compelled to limit the specification to identify the exact items traded, resulting in a narrowed, compliant specification such as "retail or wholesale services relating to engineering components".

Furthermore, engaging in over-specification severely heightens the trademark's vulnerability to non-use cancellation proceedings. Section 179 of the Trademarks Act 2019 dictates that an aggrieved party—such as a competitor blocked from entering the market—can apply to the Court or the Registrar to revoke a registered trademark if it has not been used in good faith in Malaysia for a continuous period of three years in relation to the specific goods or services for which it is registered. Therefore, if an engineering firm specializing exclusively in structural analysis software broadly registers its mark across all physical navigational and photographic apparatus in Class 9, a competitor could file for partial revocation of the unused goods. This exposes the client to unnecessary, highly expensive litigation costs and diminishes the overall robustness of the brand portfolio.

5. Financial and Procedural Framework: The MyIPO Fee Structure and Pre-Approved List

To streamline the substantive examination process and encourage taxonomic harmonization, MyIPO heavily incentivizes the utilization of its Goods and Services (Pre-Approved) List. This proprietary database contains thousands of standardized terms that the registry has already pre-vetted and deemed entirely compliant with the Nice Classification system.

6. Taxonomic Analysis of Goods Classes Pertinent to the Engineering Sector

To effectively specify goods for an engineering enterprise, an applicant must possess a nuanced, highly technical understanding of the intersection between mechanical design, electrical integration, and material science, mapping these physical realities seamlessly to the theoretical structures of the Nice Classification. The physical manifestations of engineering practice primarily traverse Classes 6, 7, 9, and 11.

Class 6: Common Metals and Structural Elements

Class 6 serves as the foundational taxonomic category for structural fabrication, and metallurgy. It is rigorously defined to encompass common metals and their alloys, unrefined ores, and robust metal materials expressly intended for building, storage, and structural construction.

The inclusion criteria for Class 6 are highly specific to structural integrity and industrial fastening. It includes heavy construction materials such as metal materials for railway tracks, rigid pipes, and heavy-duty tubes of metal. It also captures the granular components of mechanical assembly, including small items of metal hardware like industrial bolts, heavy-duty screws, nails, window fasteners, and furniture casters. Beyond basic hardware, Class 6 includes transportable buildings or structures constructed of metal, such as prefabricated temporary site offices, metallic swimming pools, cages for wild animals, and large-scale metal containers utilized for industrial storage or maritime transport, alongside high-security safes. A critical inclusion for modern engineering involves raw materials for advanced manufacturing: metals in foil or powder form designated specifically for further industrial processing, such as specialized titanium or aluminum powders utilized in industrial 3D printers, fall squarely into Class 6. Furthermore, non-electric cables and wires constructed of common metal are housed here.

The exclusions governing Class 6 highlight the Nice Classification's reliance on functional purpose over mere material composition. Despite being manufactured predominantly from highly conductive metals, electric cables are strictly excluded from Class 6; their primary function is the transmission of electricity, necessitating their placement in Class 9. Similarly, metals in foil and powder form intended for use by painters, decorators, and artists are classified in Class 2, distinguished entirely by their aesthetic end-use. Furthermore, metals processed specifically for their chemical properties or utilization in scientific chemical reactions are relegated to Class 1, while flexible pipes and hoses, even if they contain metallic elements, are classified under Class 17 if they are not rigid metallic structures.

Class 7: Machines, Machine Tools, and Industrial Robotics

Class 7 is the epicenter of mechanical engineering, automated manufacturing, and heavy industrial operations. It comprehensively covers machines, machine tools, power-operated tools, and all motors and engines, with one critical, sweeping exception: motors and engines destined for land vehicles. For clients producing heavy construction machinery, automated assembly lines, or specialized manufacturing equipment, Class 7 is the primary vector for intellectual property protection.

The breadth of Class 7 is vast, encompassing the entirety of mechanized physical labour. It covers industrial manufacturing equipment such as large-scale 3D printers, cord making machines, concrete mixers, mechanical presses utilized for metalworking, and specialized machinery like meat processing robots and meat scoring machines. Heavy earthmoving and specialized non-transportation machinery dominate the class, including bulldozers, road-sweeping machines, mechanical shovels, snow ploughs, asphalt road making machines, and the rubber tracks utilized as integral parts of their crawling mechanisms.

Crucially, Class 7 protects the internal components and mechanisms that generate and control mechanical power. This includes core engine parts such as connecting rods, cylinders, starters, mufflers, and mechanical speed variators being parts of machines. It also covers intricate control mechanisms specifically designed to operate these machines, including hydraulic controls, pneumatic controls, and mechanical control apparatus for industrial robots. Valve and regulatory engineering also finds its home here, with pressure reducing valves, pressure regulating apparatus, and pressure transducers acting as integral parts of machinery falling within this class. Furthermore, mechanized lifting and dispensing apparatus, including mechanical hoists, mechanical vehicle stacking elevators, and automatic vending machines, are included.

Equipment Category	Examples of Acceptable Specifications in Class 7
Agricultural & Earthmoving	Mechanical lawn aerators; Mechanical dethatchers; Bulldozers; Agricultural implements other than hand-operated.
Industrial Robotics	Industrial robots; Meat processing robots; Mechanical control apparatus for industrial robots.
Power Transmission & Control	Hydraulic controls for machines; Connecting rods for motors; Mechanical and hydraulic couplings for marine vessels.
Pressure Regulation	Pressure reducing valves [parts of machines]; Pressure regulators; Pressure switches as parts of machines.
Material Processing	Concrete mixers [machines]; Mechanical presses for metalworking; 3D printers; Meat slicing machines.

Table 1: Categorical Breakdown of Engineering Goods within Class 7.

Classification within Class 7 relies heavily on the presence of automated, motorized, or pneumatic power. Hand-operated hand tools and implements, such as manual wrenches, hand-held crimpers, or manual slicing tools, are strictly excluded and form the foundation of Class 8. A vital, unyielding distinction must also be made concerning vehicular engineering: engines, motors, and transmission components explicitly intended for land vehicles, alongside vehicle treads and tires, are categorically excluded from Class 7 and belong in Class 12. However, mechanical engine parts that do not serve as the primary locomotive engine for a land vehicle—such as auxiliary power units—may still reside in Class 7.

The treatment of robotics within the Nice Classification is highly nuanced and distributed based on the robot's primary function rather than its mechanical nature. While industrial manufacturing robots belong in Class 7, humanoid robots equipped with artificial intelligence, security surveillance robots, and teaching robots fall into Class 9. Robotic cars are classified in Class 12, surgical and laboratory robots belong in Class 10 due to their medical utility, and toy robots are relegated to Class 28.

Class 9: Scientific Apparatus, Safety Equipment, and Software

Class 9 is arguably the most expansive, complex, and commercially critical class in the modern engineering landscape, capturing the convergence of physical measurement instrumentation, safety engineering, and the entirely digital realm of computer algorithms. It governs apparatus and instruments for scientific research, navigation, surveying, weighing, measuring, signalling, detecting, testing, and, most importantly, information technology.

For engineers involved in research and development, Class 9 covers the essential laboratory and testing equipment, including apparatus for scientific research, material testing instruments, and diagnostic apparatus not intended for medical purposes. Aerospace and marine engineers rely on Class 9 to protect critical control and navigation systems, encompassing navigational instruments, GPS apparatus, compasses, and intricate instruments for controlling and monitoring aircraft, watercraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles. It also includes advanced simulation technology, such as training apparatus, vehicle steering simulators, and resuscitation mannequins.

Safety and security engineering is heavily represented within Class 9. It includes signalling lights, traffic-light apparatus, sound alarms, and safety nets. Crucially, it protects specialized personal protective equipment engineered to prevent serious or life-threatening injuries, such as bullet-proof clothing, fire protection gear, protective helmets, and mouth guards utilized in sports. Prior to the implementation of NCL 13-2026, large-scale safety equipment like fire engines also resided here, though they have since transitioned to Class 12. Class 9 also encompasses optical apparatus essential for engineering inspection, such as magnifying glasses and mirrors for inspecting work.

However, the overwhelming majority of modern Class 9 filings relate to software and computing infrastructure. It comprehensively covers hardware devices, microprocessors, smartwatches, wearable activity trackers, and automated teller machines. More vitally, it is the home for all downloadable and pre-recorded computer software.

When drafting specifications for engineering software within Class 9, utilizing broad, unmoored terms such as "computer programs" or "software" without qualification is a fatal error that will result in immediate objection. MyIPO and global USPTO/WIPO standards demand a clear indication of the software's subject matter or functional purpose. An acceptable specification must be detailed, reading, for example, "Downloadable computer software for use in finite element structural engineering analysis" or "Pre-recorded embedded software for controlling multi-axis industrial robotic arms". The distinction between physical, downloadable software (Class 9) and software provided over a network (Class 42) is absolute and must be navigated with extreme care.

Class 11: Environmental Control, Heating, and Cooling Installations

While Class 7 covers the generation of kinetic power, Class 11 focuses entirely on thermodynamic manipulation and environmental control. It encompasses apparatus and installations for lighting, heating, cooling, steam generating, cooking, drying, ventilating, and sanitary water supply.

For mechanical and HVAC engineers, Class 11 is critical. It includes industrial and commercial temperature control systems, such as condensing installations, refrigerating apparatus, and heavy-duty air conditioning units. It also covers specialized heating systems, including laboratory ovens—an anomaly, given that most laboratory equipment falls under Class 9—as well as commercial ice-making machines and electric appliances for food preparation. Furthermore, it captures the entirety of sanitary and plumbing engineering, including bath installations, plumbing fixtures, toilets, urinals, and municipal water purification installations.

Exclusions from Class 11 are dictated by the mechanism of action. Steam producing apparatus that function primarily as integral parts of machines belong in Class 7. Apparatus for pumping or dispensing volatile fuels are classified in Class 7 rather than being considered liquid supply installations under Class 11. Specialized lamps intended exclusively for medical utilization are placed in Class 10, while those strictly for laboratory diagnostics remain in Class 9. Additionally, under the new NCL 13-2026 taxonomy, electrically heated clothing, previously housed in Class 11 as heating apparatus, has been systematically transferred to Class 25 to align with other wearable garments.

7. Taxonomic Analysis of Service Classes Pertinent to the Engineering Sector

Engineering is inherently a service-oriented, consultative profession. While the act of manufacturing a tangible machine results in goods protected under Classes 6, 7, and 9, the intellectual act of designing the machine, the physical act of constructing a facility to house it, and the ongoing labor required to repair and maintain it require trademark protection under the service classes (Classes 35 through 45). The three primary service vectors for engineering firms are categorized within Classes 37, 40, and 42.

Class 37: Construction, Installation, and Repair Services

Class 37 captures the physical implementation and execution of engineering designs in the real world. The Explanatory Notes define Class 37 as encompassing services in the field of construction, as well as services involving the physical restoration of objects to their original condition or their preservation without altering their fundamental physical or chemical properties. This class is indispensable for civil engineering contractors, mechanical installers, systems integrators, and industrial maintenance companies.

The core of Class 37 lies in heavy civil construction and infrastructure development. It explicitly covers the construction, erection, and demolition of permanent buildings, roads, bridges, dams, and complex electrical transmission lines. It also encompasses the specialized installation services required to make these structures functional, including heavy plumbing, industrial heating equipment installation, roofing, and interior/exterior painting. Marine engineering execution, specifically shipbuilding and marine vessel repair, is uniquely situated within this class.

Furthermore, Class 37 covers the vital logistics required for large-scale engineering execution, specifically the rental and hiring of heavy construction tools, machines, and equipment, such as the rental of bulldozers, excavators, and industrial cranes.

A significant portion of Class 37 is dedicated to repair and maintenance services. This includes the repair of complex electrical systems, physical computer hardware, sensitive measuring instruments, and industrial tools. The guiding taxonomic principle is that these services must be intended to restore the object to its original working condition or preserve it, without fundamentally changing its essential properties.

When drafting specifications for Class 37, a critical distinction must be maintained between the physical act of building and the intellectual act of designing. The term "Construction engineering services [construction design]" is frequently a point of fatal confusion; the physical, labor-intensive act of building the structure is unequivocally Class 37, while the intellectual drafting of the construction plans, the architectural blueprinting, and the engineering consultancy preceding the physical build fall exclusively under Class 42.

Class 40: Treatment of Materials and Custom Manufacturing

Class 40 acts as the industrial bridge between raw materials and finished engineering goods. The official Nice Classification defines Class 40 as encompassing the "Treatment of materials; recycling of waste and trash; air purification and treatment of water; printing services; food and drink preservation". In practical engineering terms, Class 40 includes services rendered through the mechanical or chemical processing, dramatic transformation, or custom production of inorganic or organic objects. If an engineering fabrication facility alters the fundamental properties of a material for a third-party client, or manufactures bespoke, non-standard equipment to a client's exact, unique specifications, Class 40 protection is legally required.

The scope of material transformation within Class 40 is vast, covering the core activities of metallurgical and mechanical fabrication. It includes heavy metalworking, structural fabrication, industrial soldering, highly specialized welding services, laser cutting, metal shaping, and precision abrasion. It also captures chemical, thermal, and surface treatments designed to alter the durability or aesthetics of a material, such as silver plating, tin plating, industrial vulcanization, heavy powder coating, stripping of industrial finishes, and window tinting treatment acting as a surface coating. Environmental engineering processes, executed on an industrial scale, are also housed here, including municipal air purification, large-scale water treating, hazardous waste treatment, and industrial upcycling of recyclable materials.

Fabrication / Processing Activity	Applicable Nice Class	Taxonomic Justification under WIPO Guidelines
Mass Production of Standard Valves	Class 7 (Goods)	The creation of standard products marketed by the maker as their primary commercial trade. It is the sale of a good, not the rendering of a service to a specific client order.
Custom Manufacturing of Tunneling Equipment	Class 40 (Services)	Production effected entirely for the account of another person, built strictly to their unique order, blueprints, and specifications.
Routine Maintenance of an Industrial Motor	Class 37 (Services)	Preserving the motor in its original condition without changing its essential physical properties or metallurgy.
Chromium Plating of a Motor Vehicle Bumper	Class 40 (Services)	Even if performed during a "repair," the chemical plating process fundamentally transforms the material's essential surface properties.

Table 2: Differentiating Custom Manufacturing and Material Treatment from Standard Production and Repair.

The Explanatory Notes for Class 40 provide critical, highly restrictive guidance on distinguishing the manufacturing of goods from the rendering of manufacturing services. The production or manufacturing of goods is considered a service (categorized in Class 40) only in cases where it is effected strictly for the account of another person, to their specific order and precise specification. If an engineering firm mass-produces standard, off-the-shelf hydraulic valves and sells them to the public, they are functioning as a manufacturer of Class 7 goods, and the activity is not a Class 40 service. However, if a civil engineering client provides proprietary blueprints for a highly specialized, one-off trenchless tunneling machine that the firm then fabricates on a contract basis, the firm is providing a Class 40 custom manufacturing service.

Class 42: Scientific, Technological, and Engineering Services

Class 42 represents the intellectual, theoretical, and highly analytical zenith of the engineering profession. The class is defined as "Scientific and technological services and research and design relating thereto; industrial analysis, industrial research and industrial design services; quality control and authentication services; design and development of computer hardware and software". It exclusively covers services provided by persons—such as chemists, physicists, software developers, and professional engineers—in relation to the theoretical and practical aspects of complex fields of activities. This is the quintessential, indispensable class for consulting engineers, architectural firms, surveying agencies, and software development corporations.

Class 42 encompasses the entirety of engineering consultancy, theoretical design, and technical reporting. It includes the professional services of engineers and scientists who undertake complex evaluations, estimates, theoretical research, and the drafting of technical reports in the scientific and technological fields. This includes the meticulous preparation of engineering drawings, construction drafting consultancy, architectural design, urban planning, and comprehensive technological consultancy across disciplines ranging from energy technology to environmental technology. The production of specialized documentation, such as the preparation of technological research reports, scientific reports, and technical writing, is securely anchored in Class 42.

Physical testing and site inspection—provided it requires scientific analysis rather than mere mechanical labor—also falls under Class 42. This includes highly technical material testing, textile testing, scientific laboratory services, environmental testing services designed to detect biological contaminants in water, water analysis, equipment testing, and the evaluation of real estate for the presence of hazardous materials. It also captures specialized industrial evaluations, such as the evaluation of biorefining processes, control of anaerobic processes, and general industrial analysis.

However, the most explosive growth within Class 42 over the last decade has occurred in the realm of software, digital infrastructure, and data security. The development, programming, implementation, and updating of computer software are exclusively Class 42 services. This extends to the maintenance of computer programs, including complex database software, communication systems software, and even cutting-edge quantum computing and quantum programming algorithms.

The integration of Industry 4.0 paradigms into traditional mechanical and civil engineering has dramatically elevated the strategic importance of Class 42. A modern mechanical engineering firm (traditionally operating entirely in Class 7) now frequently provides real-time, remote condition monitoring of its deployed heavy machinery via proprietary cloud-based dashboards. Because this service utilizes non-downloadable software hosted on a remote server, it constitutes a Software as a Service (SaaS) or Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering, which is strictly and exclusively categorized under Class 42. Similarly, the rental of web servers, cloud computing operations, data encryption services, and technological services for securing computer data against unauthorized access are vital Class 42 services that modern engineering firms must protect to safeguard their digital ecosystems.

8. Cross-Class Convergence and Strategic Filing Methodologies

Given the fundamentally multifaceted nature of modern engineering, relying on a single-class trademark application is a severe strategic vulnerability. Trademark applicants must engage in rigorous "cross-class convergence" analysis, dissecting a client's commercial offering into its constituent physical, digital, and service-based elements to build an impenetrable intellectual property moat.

Scenario Analysis: The Autonomous Robotic Welding Cell

Consider a complex hypothetical client scenario: an advanced manufacturing enterprise is launching a revolutionary new product line branded as the "AeroWeld Autonomous Robotic Cell." This highly sophisticated product involves a physical multi-axis robotic arm, an integrated high-powered laser welder, a proprietary local software operating system embedded within the machine, physical installation services, and an ongoing cloud-based predictive maintenance subscription that utilizes artificial intelligence to prevent mechanical failures.

To achieve optimal, holistic protection without falling prey to the dangers of over-specification under Regulation 11(4), the trademark agent must dissect the product into its precise Nice Classification components:

1. Class 7: The physical industrial robot itself, the automated laser welding machine, and the mechanical control apparatus operating the arm.
2. Class 9: The downloadable or embedded control software operating the robotic hardware, as well as the integral sensor arrays and measuring apparatus utilized by the robot to guide the weld.
3. Class 37: The physical installation of the massive robotic cell at the customer's manufacturing facility, and the ongoing physical maintenance, lubrication, and repair of the mechanical joints and hardware.
4. Class 42: The SaaS platform providing the predictive maintenance analytics, the newly recognized Artificial Intelligence as a Service (AIaaS) utilized to optimize the welding paths, the remote monitoring of the computer systems, and the engineering consultancy services required to customize the software workflow for the specific automotive client.

By filing a multi-class application across Classes 7, 9, 37, and 42 utilizing the provisions of the Trademarks Act 2019, the trademark applicant ensures that every vector of the product's commercialization is legally protected. If the client, seeking to minimize filing fees, only filed in Class 7 for the physical machinery, a competitor could potentially use a highly similar mark to offer independent software integrations (Class 9) or analytical consulting services (Class 42) for that specific machinery, capitalizing on the original brand's established goodwill without facing direct infringement liability.

Distinguishing Class 37 vs. Class 42 in Civil Site Operations

A persistent, complex challenge in drafting civil engineering trademark specifications is the accurate demarcation between site operations belonging in Class 37 and those belonging in Class 42. The taxonomic boundary lies strictly between physical execution and intellectual analysis.

Civil Engineering Activity	Appropriate Nice Class	Rationale based on WIPO Explanatory Notes
Site Supervision & Construction Management	Class 37	The physical management, logistical oversight, and direct execution of the building and demolition process on the physical site.
Plumbing & Heavy Equipment Installation	Class 37	The physical alteration, integration, and installation of complex heating or plumbing systems into the constructed edifice.
Site Inspection & Environmental Testing	Class 42	The scientific analysis of soil samples, testing for hazardous materials, water quality analysis, and the preparation of technical evaluation reports.
Surveying & Construction Drafting	Class 42	The theoretical topographical mapping, CAD design, architectural blueprinting, and urban planning services conducted prior to the commencement of physical labor.

Table 3: Taxonomic Demarcation of Site Operations (Class 37 vs. Class 42).

A failure to distinguish these activities accurately will lead to immediate formality objections from MyIPO examiners, delaying the application timeline and incurring additional professional fees for amendment.

9. Procedural Best Practices and Mitigation of Formality Objections

In navigating the intricacies of the Malaysian trademark registry, applicant must meticulously align client commercial expectations with uncompromising statutory realities. The standard trademark registration process in Malaysia typically spans an average of eighteen months, provided that no substantive objections from the Registrar or third-party oppositions arise during the publication phase. Therefore, front-loading the strategic analysis and preemptively mitigating potential grounds for refusal is imperative to avoid costly, multi-year delays.

Final Strategic Maxims for Engineering Specifications

To systematically minimize office actions and procedural friction during the 18-month MyIPO examination lifecycle, agents should strictly adhere to the following drafting maxims:

First, whenever commercially viable, construct the application's specifications using terminology strictly adopted from MyIPO's Goods and Services (Pre-Approved) List. This strategy achieves dual objectives: it significantly reduces the official filing fee by RM150 per class (from the manual fee of RM1100 down to the pre-approved fee of RM950), and it effectively nullifies the risk of an examiner rejecting the terminology during formal examination for being ambiguous or overly broad.

Finally, trademark practice requires extreme foresight. For multi-year engineering mega-projects and forthcoming brand launches scheduled for the late 2020s, agents must pre-emptively integrate the NCL 13-2026 taxonomic updates into their strategic counseling immediately. Recognizing definitively that Artificial Intelligence as a Service (AIaaS) now securely resides in Class 42, and that emergency response vehicles have shifted to Class 12, ensures that the rapidly evolving software and hardware divisions of engineering conglomerates remain legally insulated against future classification disputes and infringement vulnerabilities in the decades to come.

 

Patent Prosecution in Malaysia: A Guide to Substantive Examination

 

Patent Prosecution in Malaysia: A Guide to Substantive Examination

1. Introduction: The Malaysian Patent Landscape

The protection of intellectual property rights, particularly patents, serves as a cornerstone for economic development and technological advancement in Southeast Asia. For a layperson or a client entering this jurisdiction for the first time, the Malaysian patent system offers a robust framework governed by the Patents Act 1983 and the Patents Regulations 1986, both of which underwent significant transformation via the Patents (Amendment) Act 2022. This article serves as an exhaustive guide to navigating the critical phase of patent prosecution known as "Substantive Examination."

Unlike copyright, which arises automatically upon creation, or trademarks, which protect brand identity, a patent is a state-granted monopoly for a technical invention. This monopoly is not given lightly. It must be "earned" through a rigorous process of scrutiny known as examination. In Malaysia, the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) acts as the regulatory gatekeeper. Their role is to ensure that a patent is only granted if the invention is novel (new to the world), involves an inventive step (not obvious to an expert), and is industrially applicable.

For the applicant, the prosecution process is not merely a bureaucratic hurdle but a strategic negotiation. The choices made regarding when to request examination, and whether to defer that request can determine not only the costs incurred but the very validity and enforceability of the final patent. The 2022 amendments have fundamentally altered this strategic landscape, removing the flexibility that once allowed applicants to indefinitely pause their applications. Today, the system demands proactive management and a clear understanding of strict statutory deadlines.

This article will dissect the mechanisms of Substantive Examination, analyze the new restrictions on deferment, and provide a roadmap for managing the critical 18-month or 4-year deadlines that define the pulse of a Malaysian patent application.

---

A substantive examination is the critical "make or break" phase of the patent application process where a patent examiner conducts a rigorous technical and legal review of your invention. Unlike the initial formal examination—which just checks if you filled out the paperwork correctly—this stage dives into the actual essence of your claims to determine if the invention deserves a legal monopoly. The examiner searches global databases for prior art (any existing evidence that your invention was already known) to ensure the application isn't overstepping its bounds or claiming something that already exists.

---

2. What Do Examination Covers: The Patentability Requirements

To pass this phase, the examiner verifies that your application meets several strict legal criteria:

• Novelty: The invention must be "new." If even a single piece of prior art shows your exact invention before your filing date, it fails this test.
• Inventive Step (Non-Obviousness): This is often the highest hurdle. The examiner checks if your invention would have been "obvious" to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). It shouldn’t just be a logical next step or a simple combination of two known things.
• Industrial Applicability: The invention must be capable of being made or used in some kind of industry. It cannot be purely theoretical or a violation of the laws of physics (like a perpetual motion machine).
• Sufficiency of Disclosure: You must describe the invention clearly enough that someone else in your field could actually build and use it based solely on your written description.
• Clarity and Conciseness: The "claims"—the specific legal boundaries of your invention—must be clearly defined so the public knows exactly what they are prohibited from infringing upon.

 

3. The Architecture of Patent Deadlines

In the realm of patent law, time is the most unforgiving variable. A missed deadline typically results in the irrevocable loss of rights. To understand the strategy of examination, one must first master the timeline that governs a Malaysian patent application. This timeline varies significantly depending on the route of entry: the Direct National Filing or the PCT National Phase Entry.

3.1 The Direct National Filing Route

A "Direct" filing occurs when an applicant files a patent application directly with MyIPO, without going through the international Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system. This often happens when a Malaysian company files locally first, or a foreign company files in Malaysia claiming priority under the Paris Convention within 12 months of their home filing.

For these applications, the clock ticks rapidly. The most critical deadline for prosecution is the request for examination.

The 18-Month Guillotine

Under the Malaysian system, a request for substantive examination must be filed within 18 months from the filing date of the application. This is a distinct departure from many other jurisdictions where the examination deadline is calculated from the "priority date" (the date of the first filing abroad). In Malaysia, the countdown starts from the moment the application lands at MyIPO.

• The Calculation: If an application is filed on January 1, 2024, the deadline to request examination is July 1, 2025.
• The Pressure: This 18-month window is relatively short. In many cases, if the applicant has filed a corresponding application in the US or Europe, those foreign patent offices may not have issued a search report or examination result within 18 months. This forces the direct applicant in Malaysia to make a "blind" decision—investing in the Malaysian examination process before knowing if the invention is truly patentable globally.

3.2 The PCT National Phase Route

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is a unified procedure for filing patent applications to protect inventions in each of its contracting states. A patent applicant who files a "PCT application" gets a significant extension of time before they must enter the "National Phase" in individual countries like Malaysia.

The 4-Year Strategic Window

For applications entering Malaysia via the PCT route, the deadline to request substantive examination is 4 years (48 months) from the International Filing Date.

• The Calculation:
• International Filing Date: January 1, 2020.
• National Phase Entry Deadline (30 months): July 1, 2022.
• Examination Request Deadline (48 months): January 1, 2024.
• The Advantage: This timeline offers a massive strategic advantage. By the time the 4-year mark arrives, the applicant has likely received the corresponding Clear Examination Report from the “Prescribed Countries” (Australia, UK, Japan, Republic of Korea, USA, and the European Patent Office).

3.3 Visualizing the Deadlines

The following table contrasts the critical dates for a layperson to visualize the urgency difference between the two routes.

Milestone	Direct National Filing	PCT National Phase Entry
Trigger Event	Filing Date in Malaysia	International Filing Date (PCT Filing)
Priority Deadline	12 months (to claim foreign priority)	N/A (Already claimed in PCT)
National Entry Deadline	N/A	30 months from Priority Date
Exam Request Deadline	18 Months from Filing	48 Months from International Filing
Consequence of Miss	Application Deemed Withdrawn	Application Deemed Withdrawn

3.4 The Consequences of Inaction: "Deemed Withdrawn"

If the 18-month or 4-year deadline passes without a request for examination (Form 5) or a request for deferment (Form 5B, only for MSE), the application status changes to "Deemed Withdrawn".

 

4. The Examination Dichotomy: Standard vs. Modified

Once the applicant decides to proceed, they face a pivotal choice. Malaysia operates a dual-track examination system. The applicant must choose between Substantive Examination (SE) and Modified Substantive Examination (MSE). This choice is not merely procedural; it dictates the scope of the patent, the speed of the grant, and the future defensibility of the rights.

4.1 Standard Substantive Examination (SE)

The Mechanism: Standard SE is the traditional route. It involves a full, independent review by a MyIPO examiner. The examiner conducts their own search of the prior art (existing technology) and assesses whether the invention meets the Malaysian requirements for novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.

The Obligation to Disclose (Form 5): Even though SE is an independent review, the Patents Act places a burden on the applicant to assist MyIPO. When filing Form 5, the applicant must provide information regarding corresponding applications filed in "Prescribed Countries" (Australia, UK, Japan, Republic of Korea, USA, and the European Patent Office).

• Applicants must submit the status of these applications, specifically any search results or patent numbers if granted.
• Strategic Note: This does not mean the Malaysian examiner will blindly follow the US or UK examiner. They may disagree. However, they use the foreign search results as a starting point to avoid duplicating work.

When to Choose SE:

1. No Foreign Grant Exists: If the application is unique to Malaysia or the foreign applications are still pending/rejected, SE is the only option.
2. Divergent Claims: An applicant may want broader claims in Malaysia than were allowed in the US or Europe. For example, the US might have cited a piece of "prior art" that is not valid in Malaysia (due to different grace period rules). SE allows the applicant to argue for broader protection based strictly on Malaysian law.
3. Independence: A patent granted via SE is standalone. It is harder for a competitor to attack it solely based on the invalidation of a foreign patent.

4.2 Modified Substantive Examination (MSE)

The Mechanism: MSE is a streamlined route designed to facilitate the grant of patents that have already been vetted by major patent offices. It is based on the principle of reliance. If a patent has already been granted for the same invention in a "Prescribed Country" (AU, UK, JP, KR, US, EP), MyIPO allows the applicant to request MSE.

The Requirement (Form 5A):

To file for MSE, the applicant submits Form 5A along with a Certified Copy of the foreign patent.

• The Catch: The claims in the Malaysian application must be amended to be "substantially the same" as the claims in the granted foreign patent. This is a strict conformity requirement. If the US patent was granted with 5 narrow claims, the Malaysian application must be amended to match those 5 narrow claims.

When to Choose MSE:

1. Cost Efficiency: The official fee for MSE (RM 640) is significantly lower than SE (RM 1,100). Furthermore, professional fees are often lower because the patent agent does not need to draft complex responses to examiner objections; the process is largely administrative.
2. Speed: Since the substantive patentability question has already been settled abroad, MyIPO examiners typically process MSE requests much faster, often leading to a grant within 12-18 months of the request.
3. Simplicity: It avoids the risk of a Malaysian examiner finding new prior art that the US examiner missed.

4.3 Comparative Analysis: Pros and Cons

Feature	Standard Substantive Examination (SE)	Modified Substantive Examination (MSE)
Official Form	Form 5	Form 5A
Official Fee	RM 1,100	RM 640
Prerequisite	None (can be first filing)	Must have a granted patent in AU, US, UK, JP, KR, or EP
Claim Scope	Flexible (Independent of foreign results)	Strict (Must match foreign grant)
Speed	Slower (Full search & exam)	Faster (Administrative check)
Risk Factor	Examiner may find new objections.	Tied to foreign patent's fate. If foreign patent is weak, Malaysian patent is weak.

Strategic Warning: Clients must be wary of the "MSE Trap." If a foreign patent is used as the basis for MSE, and that foreign patent is later revoked in its home country (e.g., via Inter Partes Review in the US), the Malaysian patent remains valid technically, but the groundwork of its grant is compromised. A savvy competitor might use the same arguments that killed the US patent to invalidate the Malaysian patent in court. SE provides a layer of insulation against this domino effect.

5. The 2022 Amendment: The New Deferment Regime

Perhaps the most critical update for any client entering the Malaysian market in 2024-2025 is the drastic change in deferment rules introduced by the Patents (Amendment) Act 2022. Prior to March 18, 2022, the system was forgiving. Applicants could request to defer any examination (SE or MSE) for almost any reason, often buying years of time to delay costs.

This option has been abolished. The new regime reflects a policy shift towards efficiency and reducing backlog. MyIPO now demands that applicants commit to the prosecution process unless there is a specific, statutorily valid reason to wait.

5.1 The Abolition of SE Deferment

Under the amended Section 29A(6) of the Patents Act, deferment of the filing of a request for examination is now only available for Modified Substantive Examination (MSE).

• The Implication: An applicant cannot request to defer a Standard Substantive Examination (Form 5).
• The Deadlines are Absolute: The 18-month (Direct) and 4-year (PCT) deadlines for Form 5 are now hard ceilings. You cannot file a "Form 5B" to delay a standard exam request simply because you are short on funds or undecided on strategy. You must file the request or lose the application.

5.2 The MSE Deferment Exception (Form 5B)

The legislature recognized a practical problem: MSE requires a foreign grant. Foreign patent offices (especially the USPTO or EPO) can take 3, 5, or even 7 years to grant a patent. If the Malaysian deadline is 4 years, an applicant might be forced to abandon the MSE route simply because the US office is slow.

To solve this, deferment is still permitted for MSE candidates.

• The Mechanism: The applicant files Form 5B (Request for Deferment).
• The Justification: The applicant must declare that they are waiting for a patent to be granted in a Prescribed Country for the same invention.
• The Fee: RM 150.
• The Result: The deadline to request examination is extended to 5 years from the Malaysian Filing Date (or International Filing Date).

5.3 The "Switch" Safety Net: Regulation 27B

A common strategic fear arises: "I deferred my Malaysian application to Year 5, waiting for a US patent. But at Year 4.9, the US patent is rejected. Now I can't file MSE, and I missed the deadline for SE. Is my application dead?"

The 2022 Amendments anticipate this. Regulation 27B introduces a "switch" mechanism or grace period.

• The Rule: If an applicant deferred filing for MSE but, by the end of the deferment period (5 years), the foreign patent has not been granted or is not available, the applicant may file a request for Standard Substantive Examination (Form 5).
• The Window: This request must be filed within 3 months from the expiry of the deferment period.
• The Procedure:
1. Deferment expires (e.g., at Year 5).
2. Applicant realizes no foreign grant is coming.
3. Applicant files Form 5 + Fee (RM 1,100) within the next 3 months.
4. Prosecution proceeds as a normal, independent examination.

Strategic Pivot: This 3-month window acts as a crucial safety net. It allows applicants to gamble on the cheaper/faster MSE route without risking total loss if the foreign patent fails to materialize. However, this requires meticulous docketing. Missing this 3-month post-deferment window is fatal.

6. Strategies for Acceleration: PPH and Expedited Exam

For some clients, deferment is the opposite of what they need. Startups seeking venture capital, or companies facing infringement, often need a granted patent immediately. Malaysia offers two powerful acceleration tools: the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) and Expedited Examination.

6.1 The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)

The PPH is a work-sharing arrangement between MyIPO and other major patent offices. It allows MyIPO to reuse the positive search and examination results from a partner office to speed up the Malaysian process.

• Partner Offices: MyIPO has PPH agreements with the Japan Patent Office (JPO), United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), European Patent Office (EPO), China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), and the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO).
• How it Works:
1. You receive a "Notice of Allowance" or a positive examination report in the US or Japan.
2. You file a request for PPH at MyIPO (often concurrent with Form 5).
3. You submit the claims allowed by the US/Japan office and a claims correspondence table showing how the Malaysian claims match.
• The Benefit: The MyIPO examiner fast-tracks the application. While they are not legally bound to grant it, the existence of a positive foreign report makes acceptance highly likely and significantly faster (often reducing the wait from years to months).

6.2 Expedited Examination (Rule 27E)

If an applicant does not have a foreign grant (and thus cannot use PPH), they can pay for speed via the Expedited Examination provision.

• The Cost: This is the premium option.
• Form 5H (Request for Approval): RM 250.
• Form 5I (Expedited Exam Fee): RM 2,800. (Total: RM 3,050 vs RM 1,100 for standard).
• The Criteria: Acceleration is not granted on demand; it must be justified on specific grounds:

1. National Interest: The invention relates to national security or public health.
2. Green Technology: The invention promotes environmental sustainability.
3. Infringement: There is evidence that a third party is infringing or preparing to infringe the invention.
4. Commercialization: The applicant needs the grant to secure funding or commercialize the product within 2 years.
5. Government Grants: The patent is a requirement for a university or research grant.

• The Trade-off: Speed cuts both ways. While the examiner issues a report quickly (often within 4 weeks of approval), the applicant is also placed on a "shot clock." The response time to examiner objections is shortened (e.g., to 3 weeks), requiring the legal team to be highly responsive.

7. Financial Planning: Fee Schedules and Management

Navigating the patent system requires budget forecasting. The costs involve Official Fees (paid to the government) and Professional Fees (paid to the patent agent). While professional fees vary, official fees are statutory.

7.1 Comprehensive Official Fee Schedule (2024/2025)

The following table details the key costs associated with examination and deferment management.

Action	Form No.	Official Fee (RM)	Strategic Note
Request for Substantive Exam	Form 5	1,100.00	Standard route.
Request for Modified Exam	Form 5A	640.00	Requires certified foreign grant.
Deferment of MSE Request	Form 5B	150.00	Extends deadline to 5 years.
Request for Expedited Exam	Form 5H + 5I	3,050.00	(250 + 2800). For urgent cases.
Reinstatement of Lapsed Patent	Form 5E	150.00	Plus surcharges; high risk.
Voluntary Amendment	Form 5B/Other	varies	Can be filed to align claims.
Restoration of Priority	Form 1A	150.00	If 12-month priority missed.
Certificate of Grant	N/A	Included	No separate grant fee (usually).
Annual Renewal (Year 2)	N/A	290.00	Fees rise annually.

7.2 The Hidden Costs of "Deemed Withdrawn"

While the RM 150 fee for Form 5E (Reinstatement) seems low, the true cost of missing a deadline is much higher.

1. Surcharges: Late payment often attracts a 100% surcharge on the original fee.
2. Legal Costs: Proving "unintentional delay" requires drafting statutory declarations and affidavits, which incurs significant attorney fees.
3. Risk of Loss: There is no guarantee MyIPO will accept the reinstatement. The cost of a lost patent is the potential loss of market exclusivity.

8. Strategic Case Studies

To contextualize these rules, we examine two hypothetical scenarios for a layperson client.

Case Study A: The "Tech Giant" (US-First Strategy)

Profile: A US software company files a PCT application, then enters Malaysia. They have a pending US application.

• Timeline:
• PCT Filing: Jan 2020.
• Malaysia Entry: July 2022 (30 months).
• Exam Deadline: Jan 2024 (48 months).
• Dilemma: By Jan 2024, the US patent is not yet granted.
• Strategy:

1. File Form 5B (Deferment) before Jan 2024. Pay RM 150.
2. This extends the deadline to Jan 2025 (5 years from filing).
3. Scenario 1: US Patent grants in Dec 2024. -> File Form 5A (MSE) immediately.
4. Scenario 2: US Patent still pending in Jan 2025. -> Utilize Regulation 27B. File Form 5 (SE) within 3 months (by April 2025). The application proceeds to full examination, ensuring it is not lost.

Case Study B: The "Local SME" (Direct Filing)

Profile: A Malaysian manufacturing company files directly with MyIPO.

• Timeline:
• Filing: Jan 2024.
• Exam Deadline: July 2025 (18 months).
• Constraint: Limited budget.
• Strategy:
• The SME cannot defer. Form 5B is not available because they have no foreign application to rely on.
• They must file Form 5 (RM 1,100) by July 2025.
• Cost Saving Tip: If the SME decides to abandon the application, the SME could save the RM 1,100 fee and future prosecution costs.

9. Conclusion: The New Rules of Engagement

The Malaysian patent system has evolved from a flexible, permissive regime to one that prioritizes efficiency and decisiveness. For the client new to this jurisdiction, the key takeaways are clear:

1. Deadlines are Rigid: The 18-month (Direct) and 4-year (PCT) deadlines are the single most critical dates in the prosecution lifecycle.
2. Deferment is Restricted: You can no longer buy time for a standard examination. Deferment is exclusively a tool for those waiting to use the cheaper Modified Examination (MSE) route.
3. The Safety Net Exists: The Regulation 27B "switch" mechanism allows you to aim for MSE but fall back on SE if foreign grants are delayed—but only if you act within the strict 3-month window.
4. Speed is Available: PPH and Expedited Examination offer viable paths for urgent commercial needs, provided the budget and documentation are in order.

Success in Malaysian patent prosecution requires not just invention, but procedural vigilance. By aligning your strategy with these statutory milestones, you ensure that your intellectual property remains a secured asset rather than a procedural casualty.

---

Disclaimer: This article provides general information based on the Patents Act 1983 and Regulations as of 2025. It does not constitute legal advice. Patent deadlines and fees are subject to change. Professional counsel from a registered Malaysian patent agent is strongly recommended for specific applications.

 

Don’t Be Fooled: How to Identify Unsolicited IP Services

It has come to our attention that several of our clients have recently received unsolicited letters and invoices regarding the renewal of their Intellectual Property (IP).

Please be aware that these requests often come from private companies that are not affiliated with our firm.

How to spot these unsolicited notices: These notices are designed to look official. They often use names, acronyms, and formatting that mimic government correspondence. They may:

• Create a false sense of urgency (e.g., "Your IP will expire immediately if not paid").

• Demand payment of fees.

• Imply that you must use their specific service to secure your rights.

Official Communication Channels Please remember that as your appointed patent and trademark agents, we track your deadlines and handle your renewals. If you receive a bill from a third party, do not pay it without verifying it first.

The Reality These companies are private entities. They have no authority over your IP rights. While they may technically offer to renew your IP, they may take your money without performing the renewal.

Our Advice You have already engaged us as your IP agents to manage your portfolio. We monitor your deadlines and will always notify you well in advance when a renewal is due.

If you receive a letter asking for payment:

1. Do not pay.

2. Check the sender. Is it from our firm? Is it from an official government email?

3. Forward it to us. We can confirm if it is a legitimate requirement or a solicitation to be discarded.

Innovation with Integrity: How Boon IP Aligns with SDG and ESG Standards

In today’s global economy, Intellectual Property (IP) is more than just a legal necessity—it is a driver of sustainable economic growth. At Boon IP Enterprise, we believe that Patent and Trademark Agents play a critical role in the global ecosystem. We don’t just file paperwork; we safeguard the infrastructure of innovation.

As we move into 2026, Boon IP is proud to formalize our commitment to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) principles. Here is how we are driving impact through our daily work.

The "Why": Our Commitment to the UN SDGs

Our mission aligns directly with Goal 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and Goal 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). We view IP protection as the bridge between a raw idea and a commercially viable asset.

Bridging innovation and integrity

1. Fostering Domestic Innovation (SDG 9)

• Target 9.5 & 9.b: We actively support technology development by providing high-quality, patent drafting. Our technical team works from "scratch" to ensure inventions are robustly protected.

• Our Track Record: Since 2008, we have assisted top research institutions like the University of Malaya and Monash University Malaysia in protecting inventions that contribute to the technological infrastructure.

2. Securing Economic Growth (SDG 8)

• Target 8.3: By helping entrepreneurs secure Trademarks and Patents, we enable them to formalize their creativity into tradable assets. This increases business valuation, attracts investment, and creates high-value jobs in the economy.

3. Enabling Partnerships (SDG 17)

• Target 17.6: Patents are the currency of technology transfer. Our rigorous work ensures that technology can be safely shared, licensed, and commercialized across borders, facilitating international cooperation.

---

The "How": Our Focus on ESG Governance

While SDGs define our mission, ESG principles define our operations. As a professional service provider, our strongest contribution lies in the "G" (Governance).

Clients today—especially large corporations and government bodies—need partners who are low-risk and highly compliant. Boon IP stands on a foundation of strict professional ethics.

1. Regulatory Compliance & Ethics

• As a Registered Patent Agent, we adhere to a professional code of conduct that guarantees the integrity of the IP system.

2. Data Privacy & Information Security

• We prioritize the security of our clients' trade secrets. We utilize comprehensive Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and strict data handling protocols to ensure that your "Confidential Information"—from design logic to unfiled patent claims—remains secure.

3. Anti-Corruption & Transparency

• We maintain a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption and bribery. Our business engagements are transparent, ensuring that we meet the compliance standards required by multinational corporations and government tenders. We attended the Corporate Integrity Development Programme (CIDP) and pledged compliance with the guidelines set by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

---

The Boon IP Difference: "From Scratch" to Success

Our alignment with these global goals is not just theoretical; it changes how we work with you.

Because we are committed to SDG 9 (Innovation), we take the time to draft patents from zero (the "from scratch" approach), ensuring no technical nuance is lost. Because we are committed to ESG Governance, we ensure that this drafting process is handled with absolute confidentiality and legal rigor.

Ready to protect your innovation with a partner who values integrity? Contact Boon IP Enterprise today to discuss how we can secure your intellectual property assets for a sustainable future.