[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 106 (Wednesday, June 3, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33155-33160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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 
[email protected]. 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 
[email protected]. 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), www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-launch-spark-pilot-program. 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 www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/patent-trial-and-appeal-board/resources). 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 [email protected].
    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 
www.nist.gov/standardsgov/key-federal-law-and-policy-documents-nttaa-omb-119.
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.
     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.
     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 www.uspto.gov/PatentForms).
    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 www.uspto.gov/PatentForms). 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 www.uspto.gov/PatentCenter). 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