Patentable Subject Matter in Nepal: What Can and Cannot Be Patented

The three gates every invention must pass

The PDTA's patentable-invention test has three prongs, each doing distinct work. Novelty: the invention must be new — not published or publicly known in Nepal or abroad before the application. Inventive substance: a routine variation of what is known does not earn a patent; the invention must add something technical that is not obvious to the person working in the field. Industrial applicability: the invention must be capable of being made or used in an industry — a requirement that quietly excludes purely abstract or commercial schemes.

The examination at the Department of Industry applies these gates with local practice: applications are examined on the papers and, for technical inventions, with input from Nepalese technical specialists — one reason Nepalese patent prosecution benefits from claims drafted clearly enough for a generalist examiner to follow.

• New — no prior publication or public knowledge before filing
• Inventive — more than a routine variation of what is known
• Industrially applicable — capable of manufacture or use in an industry

What cannot be patented

The exclusions cluster in three groups. Nature of the thing: discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods are not inventions; neither are business or trading methods as such. Public policy: inventions whose exploitation would be contrary to public order, morality, public health or national security are refused. Field-specific carve-outs: under Nepal's status as an LDC within the WTO/TRIPS framework, pharmaceutical products are not effectively protected by product patents in current practice — a transition regime with real consequences explored in our pharmaceutical filing guide.

The public-knowledge rule deserves emphasis in Nepal's context: an invention published before filing is dead — there is no grace period for the inventor's own disclosure, no twelve-month safety valve. Inventors are advised to file before presenting, publishing or pitching.

• Discoveries, theories, business methods — outside the statute
• Public-health, morality and security exclusions
• Pharma products: no effective product-patent protection under the LDC transition
• No inventor grace period — disclosure before filing destroys novelty

The boundary cases inventors actually meet

Real questions sit at the edges. Software: code as such is copyright's territory in Nepal; the patentable path runs through the technical invention the software implements — a device, a process, a system with technical effect. Food, chemical and mechanical improvements: squarely patentable if the three gates are met. Second-use and formulation inventions: assessed on inventive substance — a known compound with a genuinely new technical use is arguable; a trivial dosage change is not. Methods of treatment: framed as public-health-sensitive territory, generally not protected.

The honest strategy for borderline inventions: describe the invention in technical, functional terms (what it does as engineering, not as commerce), draft claims around the technical means, and get a professional read before spending on filing. Nepal's patent fees are modest, but a refused application still costs its year of delay.

• Software: protect the technical invention, not the code
• Formulations and uses: inventive substance decides
• Draft claims in engineering terms a generalist examiner can follow

Before you file: the disclosure and documentation test

A patentable invention needs a sufficient disclosure: the specification must describe the invention clearly enough that a skilled person could carry it out, with claims defining the protection sought. Inventors should assemble before filing: the technical description, drawings where relevant, inventor and applicant details, and — for foreign-owned inventions — the Power of Attorney and corporate papers the formalities require.

The Department's registration certificate opens a 7-year term, renewable twice — the full arithmetic covered in our patent-term guide. What no certificate covers: an invention that was never patentable in the first place. The subject-matter screen is the cheapest step in the process and the one most often skipped.