Clarify your questions or request a quote related to our services. Please, fill out the form and you are going to be contacted soon.
Most telecommunications portfolios lose time in Brazil for reasons that have nothing
to do with patentability. They lose it because filing strategy, accelerated examination,
and regulatory clearance are handled separately, by different people, on different
calendars.
CNV, however, manages them as one.
Telecommunications is not one sector among others before the Brazilian PTO. It is the sector that leads foreign filings.
In 2025, the three largest non-resident applicants in Brazil were all telecommunications companies:
Huawei (652 applications), Qualcomm (514), and Nokia (308). Among the 50 largest non-resident applicants in 2024, computer equipment manufacturing (18%) and telecommunications (10%)
were the dominant activities, together accounting for more than a quarter of the group.
Applicants from 89 countries filed in Brazil in 2025, led by the United States, China, Germany, France, and Switzerland. The office recorded 29,557 filings, its best result since 2016, and granted 13,624 patents.
The reading for a foreign applicant is direct. The Brazilian PTO’s non-resident docket is, first and foremost, a telecommunications docket. Capacity, bottlenecks, and prioritization policy in this field affect a larger share of foreign portfolios than in any other.
Classification in Brazil is no longer only a search question. Since 2026, it has governed access to accelerated examination.
Telecommunications filings concentrate in class H04, primarily H04B, H04J, H04L, H04M, H04N, H04Q, and H04W, with recurring boundaries into H01Q (antennas), H03M (coding) and G06F/G06N (computing and AI). IPC version 2026.01, in force since January 2026, introduced H10P and H10W for semiconductor processes and encapsulation. The Brazilian PTO applies the IPC, mandatory since 1971, and the CPC as a supplementary scheme.
This reality yields two major consequences. Under Ordinance 05/2026, monthly caps on priority examination apply specifically to applications whose main IPC is H04, so the main symbol now carries a procedural cost. And each annual IPC update may trigger automatic reclassification, changing both portfolio visibility and the applicable regime.
Examination follows Ordinance INPI/PR 411/2020. The technologies most affected are
communication protocols, radio resource management, digital signal processing, distributed systems, optical networks, network function virtualization, IoT and edge computing, and AI applied to network optimization.
Not accepted. Computer programs per se under Article 10(V), abstract algorithms, mathematical methods, and data structures claimed in isolation. Claims drafted as “computer program product”,“software”, or “application” are refused.
Accepted. Computer-implemented inventions solving a technical problem with a real technical effect. Place and environment of execution are irrelevant, IoT is expressly covered, and machine learning and deep learning qualify when applied to technical problems.
Carrier claims. Accepted where they carry instructions performing a method claimed earlier: “Non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, carry out the method according to any one of claims 1 to X.”
Standardization disclosures. Brazil grants a twelve-month grace period under Article 12. Contributions submitted to standardization working groups are published, and the interval between contribution and priority filing must be managed against that window. The grace period should be indicated at filing, and the office may require evidence of form, place, and date.
Sufficiency, and why it is urgent. Article 24 requires enablement. Where a claim is defined by a parameter, a message sequence, or a signaling procedure rather than by structure, supporting material must be identified at national phase entry and not after the first office action, because Article 32 restricts what may be added afterwards.
Translation. The guidelines recommend Portuguese for common technical terms. In protocoldrafting, where scope turns on a single functional term, translation fixes claim breadth before examination begins.
Brazil has no separate statutory regime for FRAND-encumbered patents. A FRAND commitment does not bar injunctive relief and is treated as a contractual obligation. Infringement actions concentrate before the Business Courts of Rio de Janeiro, declaratory actions before those of São Paulo, and courts now weigh court-appointed expert evidence on essentiality heavily. For a global portfolio, the Brazilian family member is no longer residual, and what determines its enforceability
is decided at drafting and national phase entry.
Not every ICT asset in Brazil is protected by patent, and the alternatives are routinely overlooked. Integrated circuit layout designs are expressly outside the patent system: they follow a separate sui generis registration regime before the Brazilian PTO, on a different term, and with diferente requirements, which foreign applicants frequently discover only after filing. Devices presenting a new form or arrangement with functional improvement may be protected as utility models, a route without equivalent in several home jurisdictions. Enclosures, product form, and graphical user interfaces may be registered as industrial designs, extending portfolio coverage at low cost.
Protection strategy must account for regulators acting in parallel with the Brazilian PTO. In telecommunications, the primary authority is ANATEL.
Homologation is mandatory and exclusive to ANATEL. No telecommunications product may be marketed or used in Brazil without it. Non-compliance may result in seizure and administrative penalties.
Foreign homologations are not recognized. Foreign test reports may be partially reused where the laboratory is accredited, and the tested parameters meet ANATEL requirements. They do not replace the Brazilian procedure.
A local holder is required in practice. Homologation may be requested by the manufacturer, by the comercial representative of a foreign entity, or by a party for its own use.
Changes restart the process. Chipset, antenna, power, or firmware changes with radiofrequency impact may characterize a new regulatory model. Resolution 780/2025 extended the framework to marketplaces, data centers, and refurbished products.
Two tracks, two timelines. A granted patent does not authorize commercialization, and homologation confers no exclusivity. Exclusivity should be in force by the time the product is marketable, and disclosures made to one authority should not compromise the position before the other. CNV maps both timelines together at the outset and identifies, in writing, every point at which one constrains the other.
Position as of July 2026. Priority examination rules for telecommunications changed twice during 2026.
Effective January 2026, the Brazilian PTO suspended priority examination, including the PPH, for applications whose main IPC is H04. Ordinance 05/2026 reopened it on 1 July under new rules:
Routes available: PPH, using examination completed at the USPTO, EPO, JPO, KIPO, or CNIPA; Technology Available in the Market; Green Patents; and proven infringement in Brazil. Where a route is secured, examination can be reduced to 9 to 16 months, against an average above five years under the ordinary route.
As a result, acceleration in Brazil has ceased to be a question of eligibility and become a question of scheduling. An applicant with thirty pending H04 families cannot accelerate them. It can accelerate one a month, and only while the quarterly quota lasts; which family occupies each slot, in which order, and against which foreign examination result, is portfolio management conducted on a calendar.
CNV runs that calendar.
Four engineers and computer scientists on telecommunications files.
Zero conflicts against the major holders of connectivity standards.
Every Brazilian PTO publication reported within 48 hours.
A technical team, not a technical contact
Telecommunications applications fail on technical reading, not on legal reasoning. The technical analysis of CNV’s telecommunications files is carried out by four professionals in engineering and computer science, who read the specification, prepare the response, and correspond with the associate in English. This ensures no single point of failure, and no file waiting for the one person in the firm who understands it.
No conflict, and no queue
The Brazilian telecommunications patent market is concentrated in a small number of firms acting for the largest holders of connectivity standards. For an applicant outside that group, this frequently means a failed conflict check, or a file waiting behind portfolios ten times its size. CNV is not conflicted against the major standard holders, and your client’s portfolio will not be the smallest file on the desk.
What we commit to
Foreign associates take competence for granted. They choose based on reliability, an area where they have been isappointed before.
How we help
H04 slot management. Monthly planning of priority examination under Ordinance 05/2026,prioritization across the portfolio, and monitoring of the remaining quarterly quota.
Adaptation of foreign claim sets. Restructuring of USPTO and EPO drafting so that software, carrier, and data-structure claims survive Article 10(V).
Article 32 strategy. Clarifying and restrictive amendments structured in strict adherence tothe law, without creating risk of future nullity.
Divisionals in complex technologies. Monitoring of the first-instance decision date, after which the window closes. Cascading divisionals are not accepted in Brazil.
Regulatory coordination, technology transfer and enforcement. ANATEL sequencing, license recordal, SEP and FRAND support, competitor watch, and infringement proceedings.
No cost. No obligation. No engagement required.
Send us your client’s pending Brazilian H04 families with the corresponding foreign examination results, and CNV will return a twelve-month slot allocation plan: eligibility screening against every route currently open, a ranked monthly schedule, the quarterly quota exposure, and identification of the families whose claim set needs adaptation before a PPH request can be filed at all.
Delivered as a dated schedule you can put in front of the client. No obligation to instruct us on any
resulting filing.
info@cnv.com.br
Telecommunications & ICT Team
We rely on twelve engineering and computer science professionals working on H04 applications directly alongside our prosecution attorneys. Our key contacts are listed below.
They read the specification, prepare the response, and correspond with you in English. Nothing is relayed through someone who has not opened the file.
BA | LL.B | PGDip | MBA | MLaw
Founder & Managing Partner
Head of IP Prosecution and Litigation
BA | LL.B | PGDip | MBA | LL.M
Senior Partner, Patent Attorney
Head of Cross-Border IP Practice
