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

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

The firm has added two leading damages specialists as it expands beyond technical analysis and deepens its role in the economics of IP litigation
Josh Seidenfeld, partner at DLA Piper, outlines the emerging legal trends that drive the future of life sciences innovation and how stakeholders can prepare for the future
South Korea's One Law Partners is combining with boutique firm Minwho Law Group to leverage global expansion of K-content and build a broader offering spanning IP, tech and regulatory advisory work
Russell Kennedy's Gina Tresidder on juggling matters, delivering hard truths, and why IP ownership is rarely as simple as people think
Attorney Oran Friar and trainee attorney Harry Cunliffe at Reddie & Grose, share that patent filings for clinical LLMs are surging, but success in the UK and Europe hinges on demonstrating technical innovation
Implementers can use the UK courts to seek FRAND terms for patent pool licences
The first credible UPC spinouts are growing, and they are coming from elite patent litigation teams, suggesting specialist litigators may no longer need large platforms to compete
Voyage IP has hired a veteran IP leader from Spruson & Ferguson as its head of trademarks, as well as another consultant who will boost the firm’s commercial offering
Lawyers say unwritten appearance expectations can disproportionately affect women and junior talent, making proactive guidance a growing responsibility for law firm leaders
Apple’s lawsuit against OpenAI, which features Tier 1-ranked disputes firms on both sides, reflects how trade secrets litigation is becoming a prominent competition feature
Gift this article