Notice2026-11098
Standards Participation and Representation Kudos (SPARK) Pilot Program
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 3, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentPatent and Trademark Office
Abstract
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is launching the Standards Participation and Representation Kudos (SPARK) Pilot Program to incentivize meaningful participation in standards development organizations (SDOs) by U.S. small and medium-sized businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations. Under the pilot program, examination of certain patent applications and ex parte appeals to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may be expedited if the U.S.-domiciled juristic applicant meaningfully participated in a voluntary consensus-based SDO and meets the requirements specified in this notice. The application or appeal being expedited does not need to be related to the SDO participation. The expedited examination or appeal provides additional tangible value for the time and resources invested in standards development. Applications accepted into the pilot program for expedited examination will be advanced out of turn, that is, accorded special status, for examination until a first Office action is issued, and ex parte appeals accepted into the pilot program will be advanced out of turn before the PTAB. This notice sets forth the requirements of the pilot program and describes how the pilot program will be administered.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 106 (Wednesday, June 3, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 106 (Wednesday, June 3, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33155-33160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-11098]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: PTO-P-2026-0265]
Standards Participation and Representation Kudos (SPARK) Pilot
Program
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is
launching the Standards Participation and Representation Kudos (SPARK)
Pilot Program to incentivize meaningful participation in standards
development organizations (SDOs) by U.S. small and medium-sized
businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations. Under the pilot
program, examination of certain patent applications and ex parte
appeals to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may be expedited if
the U.S.-domiciled juristic applicant meaningfully participated in a
voluntary consensus-based SDO and meets the requirements specified in
this notice. The application or appeal being expedited does not need to
be related to the SDO participation. The expedited examination or
appeal provides additional tangible value for the time and resources
invested in standards development. Applications accepted into the pilot
program for expedited examination will be advanced out of turn, that
is, accorded special status, for examination until a first Office
action is issued, and ex parte appeals accepted into the pilot program
will be advanced out of turn before the PTAB. This notice sets forth
the requirements of the pilot program and describes how the pilot
program will be administered.
DATES: Pilot Duration: The SPARK Pilot Program will accept petitions
requesting expedited examination or appeal beginning June 3, 2026 until
either June 3, 2027 or the date the USPTO grants a total of 200
petitions, whichever is earlier. The USPTO may, at its sole discretion,
terminate the pilot program for any reason, including factors such as
workload and resources needed to administer the program, feedback from
the public, and the effectiveness of the program. If the pilot program
is terminated, the USPTO will notify the public. The USPTO, on its
website, will specify the number of petitions filed and the number of
petitions granted under the pilot program.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions or comments regarding
this pilot program, please contact Susy Tsang-Foster, Senior Legal
Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Patents, at 571-272-7711; or Brannon Smith, Senior
Legal Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the
Deputy Commissioner for Patents, at 571-270-1601; or
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8fdcdfceddc4fffde0e8fdeee2cffafcfffbe0a1e8e0f9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b1e2e1f0e3fac1c3ded6c3d0dcf1c4c2c1c5de9fd6dec7">[email protected]</span></a>. For questions on electronic filing, please
contact the Patent Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197
(during its operating hours of 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET, Monday-Friday) or
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b4d1d6d7f4c1c7c4c0db9ad3dbc2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="89ecebeac9fcfaf9fde6a7eee6ff">[email protected]</span></a>. For questions related to a particular petition
requesting expedited examination of an application, please contact the
Office of Petitions at 571-272-3282. For questions related to a
particular petition requesting expedited ex parte appeal of an
application, please contact the Patent Trial and Appeal Board at 571-
272-9797.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USPTO is launching the Standards
Participation and Representation Kudos (SPARK) Pilot Program to
incentivize meaningful participation in standards development
organizations (SDOs) by U.S. small and medium-sized
[[Page 33156]]
businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations. Technical
standards are a key component of the innovation ecosystem--from
telecommunications and artificial intelligence to manufacturing and
cybersecurity--and American leadership in standards development is
essential to innovation, competitiveness, and national security. Small
and medium-sized businesses, universities, and non-profit organizations
bring critical expertise and innovative thinking to standards
development. However, resource constraints often prevent smaller U.S.
entities from meaningfully participating in SDOs, where standards are
developed that can determine market access and shape the competitive
landscape. The SPARK program helps to lessen these constraints by
offering expedited examination for applications and expedited appeals
to the PTAB to certain U.S.-domiciled juristic applicants that have
made technical contributions to or otherwise meaningfully participated
in SDO activities. The application or appeal being expedited under the
program does not need to be related to the SDO participation.
The initial design of the pilot program envisioned a two-step
process for eligible applicants to receive expedited examination of
patent applications or appeals to the PTAB. See Press Release, USPTO to
launch SPARK Pilot Program to strengthen U.S. standards development
leadership (January 13, 2026), <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-launch-spark-pilot-program">www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-launch-spark-pilot-program</a>. The first step offered redeemable
certificates for expedited examinations or appeals if participants met
certain requirements, and the second step allowed successful
participants to redeem these certificates to expedite an examination or
appeal before the USPTO. The program has been redesigned as a one-step
petition process to enable eligible participants to immediately request
expedited examinations and appeals. Earlier review of patent
applications and appeals offered under the program to eligible
participants provides additional tangible value for the time and
resources invested in standards development.
New patent applications ordinarily are taken up for examination in
the order of their U.S. filing date or national stage entry date (see
sections 708 and 1893.03(b) of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
(MPEP) (9th Edition, Rev. 01.2024, November 2024)), and appeals to the
PTAB are normally taken up for decision in the order in which they are
docketed (see USPTO Standard Operating Procedure 1 (June 12, 2024),
available at <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/patent-trial-and-appeal-board/resources">www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/patent-trial-and-appeal-board/resources</a>). The USPTO has procedures to advance out of
turn, that is, accord special status to, the examination of a utility
application, provided that the applicant files (1) a petition to make
special, or (2) a request for prioritized examination. See 37 CFR 1.102
and Discontinuation of the Accelerated Examination Program for Utility
Applications, 90 FR 24324 (June 10, 2025) (final rule). A small number
of appeals are advanced out of turn due to a special status accorded to
the application throughout prosecution without the need to separately
petition the PTAB for special status. For example, appeals in
reexamination proceedings and reissue applications are treated as
special because reexamination proceedings are handled by the USPTO with
``special dispatch,'' and reissue applications are treated as special
throughout their pendency. See Section 708.01 of the MPEP. Applications
that have been ``made special'' during examination through a petition
based on the age or health of the inventor or a joint inventor, or for
other reasons listed in 37 CFR 1.102 (a)-(d), also maintain their
special status through any appeal. See MPEP 1203(II). Furthermore, for
the same reasons, an appellant may also petition the PTAB to have an
application on appeal made special. See id.
In order for an applicant to participate in the program, the
applicant must file a petition under the program and meet all the
requirements detailed in Part I of this notice. To expedite examination
under this program, the applicant must file a petition to make special
under 37 CFR 1.102(d) in an original (non-reissue) nonprovisional
utility application using form PTO/SB/479a (see Part I.F. below).
Applications accepted into the program will be advanced out of turn,
that is, accorded special status, until a first Office action under 35
U.S.C. 132 (hereinafter ``first Office action''), which may be a
written restriction requirement, is issued. After the first Office
action, the application will no longer be treated as special during
examination. To expedite an appeal under this program, the appellant
must file a petition under 37 CFR 41.3 in an original (non-reissue)
nonprovisional utility application under appeal using form PTO/SB/479b
(see Part I.F. below). Appeals accepted in the program will be taken
out of turn for assignment to a PTAB panel. Based on the special
procedure specified in this notice, the petition fee requirements of 37
CFR 41.3 and 37 CFR 1.102(d) are hereby waived. No petition fees are
required to file a petition requesting participation in the program. In
addition, all of the other requirements for a petition under 37 CFR
1.102(d) as set forth in MPEP 708.02(a) are also waived by this
program.
I. Requirements To Participate in the SPARK Pilot Program
The application or appeal and the petition must meet the following
requirements.
A. Applicant Eligibility
To qualify for this program, the applicant must meet the following
requirements as of the date the petition under the program is filed.
The term ``applicant'' is inclusive of applicants and appellants
throughout this notice.
i. Small Entity Qualifications
The applicant must be a juristic entity (for example, an
organizational assignee) and must certify in the petition that it is a
small business concern or a nonprofit organization (including a
university or other institution of higher education) and that it
qualifies as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.27 at the time of filing the
petition under the program. The petition must also certify that the
application is in a discounted fee status, that is, the applicant has
already asserted small entity status or certified micro entity status.
The term ``small business concern'' is defined under section 3 of
the Small Business Act. For purposes of USPTO fee discounts and this
program, a small business concern must satisfy the requirements of 37
CFR 1.27(a)(2) including the size standards set forth in the Small
Business Administration (SBA) rules 13 CFR 121.801 through 121.805.
These SBA rules require, inter alia, that the concern's ``number of
employees, including affiliates, does not exceed 500 persons.'' In this
regard, SBA rules 13 CFR 121.103 and 121.106 set forth how affiliation
is determined and how to calculate the number of employees. Questions
relating to standards for a small business concern may be directed to
the Small Business Administration, Office of Size Standards, 409 Third
Street SW, Washington, DC 20416, or by telephone at (202) 205-6618, or
by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5f2c36253a2c2b3e313b3e2d3b2c1f2c3d3e71383029"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="592a30233c2a2d38373d382b3d2a192a3b38773e362f">[email protected]</span></a>.
The term ``nonprofit organization'' is defined in 37 CFR
1.27(a)(3), and includes universities and other institutions of higher
education, organizations of the type described in section 501(c)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 501(c)) and
[[Page 33157]]
exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code
(26 U.S.C. 501(a)), and nonprofit scientific or educational
organizations qualified under a State nonprofit organization statute.
For more information about nonprofit organizations for purposes of
USPTO fee discounts and this program, see section 509.02, subsection
III, of the MPEP.
If the juristic applicant has established either small entity
status or micro entity status in the application at the time the
petition is filed, then the applicant has met the small entity
qualification. In order to qualify for micro entity status, an
applicant must necessarily qualify for small entity status. See 37 CFR
1.29 and MPEP 509.04 for information on establishing micro entity
status.
ii. Domicile Requirement
The applicant must be domiciled in the United States or its
territories and must make this certification in the petition. For
purposes of this program, the domicile of a juristic applicant is the
principal place of business of the applicant. The domicile of a
juristic applicant will normally be determined based on the mailing
address made of record that was provided in the Applicant Information
section of the Application Data Sheet (ADS). If the mailing address of
record is not the applicant's principal place of business, applicant
should file a corrected ADS to update the mailing address to match its
domicile no later than the date the petition under the pilot program is
filed.
iii. Application Must Name a Single Juristic Entity as the Applicant
Since the expedited examination of the application or appeal is
based on a single juristic entity's meaningful participation in SDO
activities in developing a technical standard, the application must
name a single juristic entity as the applicant. If more than one
juristic entity is named as the applicant or if a juristic entity and
an individual are named as the applicant, the application is not
eligible for this program. For example, an application naming Company A
and University B as the applicant is not eligible for the pilot
program. Similarly, an application naming Company A and Inventor X as
the applicant is not eligible for the pilot program.
B. SDO-Related Requirements for Meaningful Participation in an SDO
i. Voluntary Consensus-Based SDOs
The applicant must certify in the petition that it meaningfully
participated (as explained below in Part I.B.iii.) in developing a
technical standard with a voluntary consensus-based SDO. Voluntary
consensus-based SDOs facilitate broad representation in the standards
setting process by being open to all interested stakeholders. Non-
exhaustive examples of voluntary consensus-based SDOs include SDOs
accredited by the American National Standards Institute or
international SDOs operating under the principles of openness, balance,
due process, and an appeals process. Furthermore, the United States
promotes voluntary consensus-based standards. See, for example, 15
U.S.C. 272(b)(3), which, in discussing the functions of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), emphasizes ``where
possible the use of standards developed by private, consensus
organizations.'' See also OMB Circular A-119 (revised 2016) at
<a href="http://www.nist.gov/standardsgov/key-federal-law-and-policy-documents-nttaa-omb-119">www.nist.gov/standardsgov/key-federal-law-and-policy-documents-nttaa-omb-119</a>.
ii. Identification of the Technical Standard
The technical standard must be completely identified in the
petition. The technical standard should be identified by including its
alpha-numeric designation along with its title in the space provided in
the petition form (form PTO/SB/479a or form PTO/SB/479b). Typically,
the format for identifying a technical standard includes a prefix
containing the acronym of the SDO(s) (the prefix may also contain other
acronyms about the standard or its status) followed by the unique
identifier for the standard (which is usually numeric but can be alpha-
numeric), the year of its publication, and the title of the standard.
If the SDO does not have an acronym, the applicant should provide the
full name of the SDO before the unique identifier. The following is an
example of how the technical standard should be identified in the
petition form: ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Information technology--Artificial
intelligence--Management system. This example is a joint standard
developed by the SDOs ISO and IEC as indicated by the prefix ISO/IEC.
The unique identifier is 42001 (also referred to as the standard
number), its publication year is 2023 (some SDOs use a hyphen instead
of a colon between the unique identifier and the publication year), and
the title of the standard is ``Information technology--Artificial
intelligence--Management system.''
If the technical standard is a new standard currently under
development, the applicant should indicate ``202x'' for the publication
year. If a permanent unique identifier for the standard has not been
assigned for the new standard currently under development, the
applicant should list the temporary identifier assigned by the SDO. For
example, if the new technical standard is currently under development
and is unpublished, the technical standard should be identified as
``[prefix containing acronym for SDO(s)] XXXXXX-202x [title]'' where
XXXXXX is the temporary identifier assigned by the SDO.
If the technical standard under development is a revision of an
existing standard, the applicant should provide the technical standard
being revised in parentheses immediately after identifying the standard
under development on the petition form. The applicant should indicate
on the petition form the alpha-numeric designation of the existing
standard being revised in parentheses as follows: (revision of [prefix
containing acronym for SDO(s)] [unique identifier] [year of
publication]).
iii. Meaningful Participation With a Voluntary Consensus-Based SDO
The applicant must certify in the petition that it meaningfully
participated in developing the technical standard identified in the
petition with a voluntary consensus-based SDO. For the purposes of this
pilot program, meaningful participation with a voluntary consensus-
based SDO in developing the technical standard means completing 40 or
more hours of active participation with the voluntary consensus-based
SDO. Non-limiting examples of active participation with a voluntary
consensus-based SDO include drafting and submitting proposals or
technical contributions, participating in a working group or technical
committee, and providing public comments on a draft technical standard.
The meaningful participation must have taken place on or after January
13, 2026, which is the date that the pilot program was first announced.
C. Eligible Applications and Appeals
The pilot program is available for original (non-reissue)
nonprovisional utility applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) and
any ex parte appeals of these applications. Applications entering the
national stage under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) as set forth
in 35 U.S.C. 371 are not eligible for this program.
To be eligible for expedited examination under the program, the
application must not have been previously granted special status under
[[Page 33158]]
any other program. For example, if an application was previously
granted special status under prioritized examination as provided for in
37 CFR 1.102(e) (also known as Track One), the application will not be
eligible for expedited examination under this program. Similarly, the
application will not be eligible for expedited examination under this
program if it received special status due to the age or health of the
inventor or a joint inventor. To be eligible for expedited appeal to
the PTAB under this program, the appeal must not be currently granted
special status under any program. If an appeal of the application is
currently under special status due to the age or health of the inventor
or a joint inventor or the appeal is currently subject to any other
pilot program that advances the appeal out of turn (for example, the
Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program), the appeal would not be eligible for
this pilot program. See MPEP 708.01 for a complete list of cases that
are treated as special during appeal. Special status previously granted
to an application does not bar expedited appeal of that application
under this program if the application is currently not under special
status when on appeal to the PTAB.
D. Claim Limits and No Multiple Dependent Claims
The application must contain no more than three independent claims
and no more than 20 total claims (``program claim limits'') and must
not contain any multiple dependent claims. If an application exceeds
three independent claims or 20 total claims, or if it contains any
multiple dependent claims, the applicant should file a preliminary
amendment in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (for petitions to expedite
examination of an application) or an amendment in compliance with 37
CFR 41.33 (for petitions to expedite an appeal) to cancel any excess
claims or multiple dependent claims no later than the date the petition
under the pilot program is filed. Any amendment to the claims submitted
after the filing date of the petition will not be considered in
deciding the petition.
After an application has been granted special status under the
pilot program, any amendment that does not comply with the program
claim limits or adds a multiple dependent claim is not permitted. The
examiner may refuse entry of any amendment filed in reply to an Office
action that, if entered, would result in a set of pending claims that
exceeds the program claim limits or adds a multiple dependent claim.
See Part III.A. of this notice.
The petition to expedite examination must include a statement that
applicant agrees not to present an amendment with more than three
independent claims, more than 20 total claims, or a multiple dependent
claim during the remainder of prosecution if the application is
accepted into the program. Form PTO/SB/479a contains the required
statement.
E. Petition Filing Limit and Only One Granted Petition per Technical
Standard
The applicant must certify in the petition that (1) it has not
submitted any other petition under this program based on the same
technical standard identified in the petition that either was granted
or is currently undecided, and (2) it has not submitted more than two
other petitions under this program. In other words, no more than one
petition under the program based on applicant's participation in
developing the same technical standard may be granted or be currently
undecided, and the applicant may file no more than three petitions
under the program, which includes petitions that are currently
undecided, granted, or dismissed.
For purposes of this pilot, a revised standard is not the ``same
technical standard'' as an earlier version of the standard.
Furthermore, the applicant may have up to two petitions granted under
the program in the same application that are based on its meaningful
participation for different technical standards (that is, a first
petition to expedite examination based on its meaningful participation
in developing technical standard TS1, and a second petition to expedite
an appeal in the same application based on its meaningful participation
in developing a second technical standard TS2).
The following examples illustrate the petition filing limit of
three petitions under the program (both petitions to expedite
examination and petitions to expedite appeals under this pilot program
count towards this limit) and the prohibition of more than one granted
petition based on the same technical standard.
<bullet> Company A, named as the applicant on the application,
files a first petition to expedite examination under the program based
on its meaningful participation in developing technical standard TS1.
It should not file any other petition under the program based on
technical standard TS1, including a petition under the program to
expedite examination of another application or a petition to expedite
the appeal in the same application or in another application. Company A
may file another petition based on its meaningful participation in
developing standard TS2 to expedite examination in another application
and another petition based on its meaningful participation in
developing standard TS3 to expedite an appeal in an application. If
Company A files a fourth petition under the program based on its
meaningful participation in developing standard TS4 to either expedite
examination of an application or an appeal, the petition will be
dismissed because Company A has already filed three petitions under the
program.
<bullet> Company B, named as the applicant on the application,
files three petitions--one based on the technical standard TS1 and two
based on the technical standard TS2. Only two of the petitions based on
technical standards TS1 and TS2 may be granted and the third petition
based on technical standard TS2 will be dismissed because another
petition based on the same technical standard was granted. If Company B
files a fourth petition based on technical standard TS3, the petition
will be dismissed because Company B has already filed three petitions
under the program.
F. Petition Requirements
i. USPTO Form Required for Filing Petition
To request expedited examination under this pilot program, an
applicant must file a petition to make special under 37 CFR 1.102(d)
using USPTO form PTO/SB/479a, titled ``CERTIFICATION AND PETITION TO
MAKE SPECIAL UNDER THE STANDARDS PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION KUDOS
(SPARK) PILOT PROGRAM TO EXPEDITE EXAMINATION OF AN APPLICATION''
(available at <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/PatentForms">www.uspto.gov/PatentForms</a>).
To request expedited appeal under this pilot program, appellant
must file a petition under 37 CFR 41.3 using USPTO form PTO/SB/479b,
titled ``CERTIFICATION AND PETITION UNDER THE STANDARDS PARTICIPATION
AND REPRESENTATION KUDOS (SPARK) PILOT PROGRAM TO EXPEDITE AN APPEAL TO
THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD (PTAB)'' (available at <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/PatentForms">www.uspto.gov/PatentForms</a>). The petition under 37 CFR 41.3 must identify the
application and appeal by application number and appeal number,
respectively.
The USPTO forms PTO/SB/479a and PTO/SB/479b contain all the
certification statements required to participate in the pilot program.
Use of
[[Page 33159]]
the USPTO forms will enable the USPTO to quickly identify and timely
process the petitions. In addition, use of the USPTO forms will help
applicants understand and comply with the petition requirements of the
pilot program. The USPTO has submitted change worksheets to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
ii. Electronic Filing of the Petition Required
The petition requesting expedited examination under the program may
only be made by filing form PTO/SB/479a, which must be filed
electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system, which
is currently Patent Center (at <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/PatentCenter">www.uspto.gov/PatentCenter</a>). Applicants
must file the petition using the document description ``Petition to
make application special under the SPARK pilot.''
The petition requesting expedited appeal to the PTAB under the
program may only be made by filing form PTO/SB/479b, which must be
filed electronically using the USPTO's Patent Center. Appellants must
file the petition using the document description ``Petition to expedite
an appeal under the SPARK pilot and Rule 41.3.''
iii. Time for Filing the Petition Under the Program
The petition to request expedited examination using USPTO form PTO/
SB/479a must be filed before a first Office action, including an action
containing only a written restriction requirement, is issued in the
application. An applicant should not file a petition to make special
under the pilot program in an application that is already docketed to
an examiner. Because preparing a first Office action may begin soon
after an application is docketed to an examiner, the USPTO will
generally dismiss a petition under the pilot program if the application
has already been docketed to a particular examiner in a Technology
Center at the time the petition is taken up for decision.
The petition to request expedited appeal to the PTAB using USPTO
form PTO/SB/479b must be filed between (1) the date when the PTAB
issues a notice that the appeal has been docketed to the PTAB, and (2)
the date at which the appellant withdraws the appeal, a final decision
is rendered by the PTAB under 37 CFR 41.50, or PTAB jurisdiction ends
under 37 CFR 41.35. Petitions may be filed for ex parte appeals
regardless of whether the appeal is newly docketed or was previously
docketed.
iv. Signature Requirements for the Petition
Juristic applicants must be represented by a patent practitioner.
See 37 CFR 1.31. The petition for the program must be properly signed
by a registered patent practitioner in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33(b)
and 11.18.
G. Limits on the Number of Petitions Granted Under the Pilot Program
The limits on the number of petitions granted under the program
include both the petitions granted to expedite examination and
petitions granted to expedite an appeal to the PTAB. The number of
petitions granted under the program is limited to 50 granted petitions
per quarter, and a total of 200 granted petitions. In addition, no more
than 50 petitions may be granted to expedite appeals under the program,
and no more than 50 petitions may be granted to expedite examination
under the program for each Technology Center (TC) that examines utility
applications. Once a quota for a quarter or for the program is reached,
the remaining petitions, even those filed in new applications
undergoing pre-examination processing, will generally be dismissed. The
start and end dates for each quarter will be posted on the program web
page, and each quarter will span approximately three months. Before
filing a petition under the program, applicant should check the program
web page to see whether the PTAB, TC, and quarterly petition grant
limits have been reached.
II. Handling of Petitions Under the Pilot Program
A. Petitions Filed To Expedite Examination of an Application
If the applicant files a petition to expedite examination under the
pilot program, the USPTO will usually decide the petition in the order
received. A petition to expedite examination under this program is
grantable only during the time period after the application has
completed pre-examination processing and before a first Office action
is issued. If the petition is granted, the application will be accorded
special status under the pilot program. The application will be placed
on an examiner's special docket until the first Office action (which
may be a written restriction requirement) is issued. After the first
Office action, the application will no longer be treated as special
during examination. For example, if an amendment is filed in response
to a first Office action, it will be placed on the examiner's regular
amended docket.
Meeting the requirements in Part I of this notice will not ensure
acceptance of the application into the pilot program. The USPTO will
generally dismiss a petition under the pilot program to expedite
examination if the application has already been docketed to an examiner
in a Technology Center at the time the petition is being reviewed for
decision or if a program quota as set forth in Part I.G. of this notice
has been reached. If the petition to expedite examination under the
pilot program does not comply with the requirements set forth in this
notice, the applicant will be notified by a decision dismissing the
petition. In view of the limited duration of the pilot program and the
limited number of applications being accepted into the pilot program,
an applicant will not have an opportunity to correct deficiencies in
the petition after a petition is dismissed on the merits. However, if a
petition was dismissed solely because a quota was reached, that is, the
petition was not dismissed on the merits, then applicant may file
another petition to expedite examination under the pilot program in the
same application during the next quarter of the program but both of
these filings count towards applicant's petition filing limit.
B. Petitions Filed To Expedite an Appeal to the PTAB
Petitions to expedite an appeal under this program will be decided
in the order they are received. Meeting the requirements in Part I of
this notice will not ensure acceptance of an appeal into the pilot
program. The USPTO will generally dismiss a petition to expedite an
appeal under the program if a program quota as set forth in Part I.G.
of this notice has been reached. Petitions meeting the requirements
listed above for entry into the pilot program including program quota
limits will be granted, and the appellant will be notified by a
decision granting the petition of the special status accorded to the
appeal. Petitions not meeting the requirements will be dismissed, and
the appellant will be notified by a decision dismissing the petition.
In view of the limited duration of the pilot program and the limited
number of appeals being accepted into the pilot program, an appellant
will not have an opportunity to correct deficiencies in the petition
after a petition is dismissed on the merits. However, if a petition was
dismissed because a quota was reached, then appellant may file another
petition to expedite an appeal under this
[[Page 33160]]
program in the same application under appeal during the next quarter of
the program, but both of these filings count towards appellant's
petition filing limit.
III. Prosecution of the Application Granted Special Status Under the
Pilot Program
A. Replies by the Applicant Under the Pilot Program
The time periods set for reply in Office actions for an application
granted special status under the pilot program will be the same as
those set forth in section 710.02(b) of the MPEP. A reply to an Office
action must be fully responsive to the rejections, objections, and
requirements made by the examiner. Any amendment filed in reply to an
Office action may be treated as not fully responsive if it attempts to:
(1) add claims that would result in more than three independent claims
or more than 20 total claims pending in the application; or (2) add any
multiple dependent claim(s).
If a reply to a non-final Office action is not fully responsive for
failing to comply with the pilot program's claim requirements but is a
bona fide attempt to advance the application to final action, the
examiner may, at the examiner's discretion, issue a Notice of Non-
Responsive Amendment and provide a shortened statutory period of two
months for the applicant to supply a fully responsive reply. Extensions
of this time period under 37 CFR 1.136(a) to the Notice of Non-
Responsive Amendment will be permitted, but in no case can any
extension carry the date for reply to this notice beyond the maximum
period of six months set by statute (35 U.S.C. 133). However, any
further non-responsive amendment typically will not be treated as bona
fide, and as such, the time period set in the prior notice will
continue to run.
B. After-Final and Appeal Procedures
Any amendment, affidavit, or other evidence after a final Office
action and prior to appeal must comply with 37 CFR 1.116. During the
appeal process, the application will be treated in accordance with the
normal appeal procedure (see MPEP Chapter 1200) unless the appeal is
granted special status under this program or another program.
C. Application Cannot Be Withdrawn From the Pilot Program
There is no provision to withdraw an application undergoing
expedited examination from the pilot program. An applicant may abandon
an application that has been granted special status under the pilot
program in favor of a continuing application. A continuing application
will not be granted special status based on the petition filed in the
parent application. Each application (including each continuing
application) must, on its own merit, meet all requirements for special
status under the pilot program, and be accompanied by its own petition
as detailed in Part I above.
IV. Conduct of Appeals Accepted Into the Pilot Program
A. Hearings
A petition to participate in the pilot program may be filed for ex
parte appeals in which the appellant seeks an oral hearing before the
PTAB, that is, ``heard'' appeals, as well as those appeals for which no
oral hearing is requested, that is, ``on-brief'' appeals. Hearings in
ex parte appeals accorded special status under the pilot program will
be conducted according to the standard PTAB hearing procedures.
Appellants seeking an oral hearing should submit, along with the
request for oral hearing, any preferences as to the time, date, or
location of the hearing. The PTAB will make best efforts to schedule a
hearing in accordance with such preferences. If the PTAB is unable to
accommodate an appellant's preferences, it will schedule the hearing in
an available hearing room at any office, including a regional office.
An appellant may waive the hearing and continue under the pilot program
for consideration and decision on the briefs. An appellant may not
reschedule the date or time of a hearing and remain in the pilot
program. If an appellant in an ex parte appeal accorded expedited
status must reschedule the date or time of a hearing and is not willing
to waive the oral hearing, then the appellant may opt out of the pilot
program, thereby regaining the ability to reschedule or relocate the
hearing as per standard PTAB hearing procedures.
B. Termination of Expedited Status of Appeal
Under the pilot program, special status will be maintained in an ex
parte appeal from the date the petition for inclusion in the pilot
program is granted until the PTAB's jurisdiction ends under 37 CFR
41.35(b). Activities subsequent to an appellant's withdrawal from the
pilot program or the PTAB's decision, including any reopened
prosecution, will not be treated as subject to expedited status, nor
will filing a petition to expedite an appeal under the pilot program
cause an application to be accorded expedited status outside the
jurisdiction of the PTAB. Additionally, any request by an appellant
causing a delay in the conduct of the appeal, such as for an extension
of time under 37 CFR 1.136(b) or for additional briefing, will be cause
for removal of expedited status.
John A. Squires,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2026-11098 Filed 6-2-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 3, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.