The rules are out: key provisions of new USPTO procedures

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

The rules are out: key provisions of new USPTO procedures

The USPTO’s proposed rules for post grant review, inter partes review, transitional covered business methods programme and derivation proceedings have been posted on the Office’s website

The Office must implement the rules by September this year and March next year.

Managing IP picks out the most important aspects for patent applicants and practitioners.

Fees

Petition for inter partes review

estimated cost to prepare petition: $46,000;

filing fee for 20 or fewer claims: $27,200;

21 to 30 claims: $34,000;

31 to 40 claims: $40,800;

41 to 50 claims: $54,400;

51 to 60 claims: $68,000;

additional groups of 10 claims: $27,200 per group;

cost of a motion, opposition, or reply: $47,600.

Total = at least $73,200



Petition for post-grant review or transitional review of a covered business method

estimated cost of preparing the petition: $61,333;

filing fee for 20 or fewer claims: $35,800;

21 to 30 claims: $44,750;

31 to 40 claims: $53,700;

41 to 50 claims: $71,600;

51 to 60 claims: $89,500;

additional groups of 10 claims: $35,800 per group;

filing a patent owner preliminary response to a petition for review: $34,000;

request for reconsideration of refusal to institute review: $27,200;

cost of a motion, opposition, or reply: $44,200.

Total = at least $97,133

Derivation proceedings

estimated cost to prepare a petition: $61,333;

cost of motion, opposition, or reply: $34,000.

General

cost per party for oral hearings: $6,800;

requests to treat a settlement as business confidential: $680;

requests for adverse judgment: $340;

arbitration agreements and awards: $1,360;

requests to make a settlement agreement available: $740;

submission of a copy of a notice of appeal or a notice of election: $34.


Estimated aggregate burden on the public of implementing proposed rules in FY 2013

Inter partes review: $54.1 million

Derivation proceedings: $11,865,210

Post grant review: $22,761,410

Timing

Inter partes review

Petition must be filed after the later of:

(1) the date that is nine months after the date of the grant of the patent or of the issuance of the reissue patent; or

(2) if a post-grant review is instituted, the date of the termination of such post-grant review.

Post-grant review

Petition must be filed no later than the date that is nine months after the date of the grant of a patent or of the issuance of a reissue patent. A petition, however, may not request a post-grant review for a claim in a reissue patent that is identical to or narrower than a claim in the original patent from which the reissue patent was issued unless the petition is filed not later than the date that is nine months after the date of the grant of the original patent.

Derivation

Petition must be filed within one year after the first publication of a claim to an invention that is the same or substantially the same as the earlier application’s claim to the allegedly derived invention.

Transitional covered business method programme

Petition may be filed any time except during the period in which a petition for a post-grant review of the patent has been filed in accordance with the statute.

Discovery

Default scheduling orders will provide for limited discovery including depositions of witnesses submitting affidavits and declarations. Additional discovery will be granted rarely, on a case by case basis, upon a showing that it is in “the interests of justice” and would not be an economic burden on the opposing party.

Pro hac vice admission

Non-registered practitioners may be admitted pro hac vice, on a case-by-case basis based on the facts and circumstances of the trial and party, as well as the skill of the practitioner.


Likeliest users

Based on the filing trends of inter partes reexamination requests, it is anticipated that petitions for inter partes review and post grant review will be filed across all technologies with approximately 50% being filed in electrical technologies, approximately 30% in mechanical technologies, and the remaining 20% in chemical technologies and design.”


more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

New Asia-Pacific IP head Jonathan Chu is eyeing opportunities arising from Chinese technology licensing, overseas enforcement and increasingly IP-heavy cross-border deals
Europe’s largest intellectual property convention and trade fair is back: IP Service World 2026 takes place in Munich from November 23–25 – the 16th edition, with 1,400-plus attendees from 55-plus nations, 100-plus speakers, and 100-plus exhibitors. Three days. Two focused areas. One IP marketplace.
Mehmet Gün and Uğur Aktekin discuss four decades of change in Türkiye’s legal market, the firm’s commitment to independence and the challenge of building an institution that can outlast its founders
Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
Gift this article