Global IP Information

2026-01-21

USPTO extends Patent Prosecution Highway pilot program

USPTO

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has extended its Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) pilot program with the other IP5 offices until January 5, 2029, so that eligible applicants may continue to obtain the benefits of expedited prosecution and to maintain the USPTO’s commitment to enhancing intellectual property cooperation. The other IP5 offices are the European Patent Office, the Japan Patent Office, the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Intellectual Property, and the China National Intellectual Property Administration.

2026-01-19

EPO and IP Australia to launch PCT pilot programme starting 1 March 2026

EPO

The President of the European Patent Office (EPO), António Campinos, and the Director General of IP Australia, Michael Schwager, today announced that under a two-year pilot programme starting on 1 March 2026, Australian applicants will be able to designate the EPO as their International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

2026-01-19

Patent practitioner processes and new OED developments

USPTO

Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) regulates individuals who practice before the USPTO in patent and trademark matters. In this basics course, we discussed the process of becoming registered to represent others in patent matters, the practitioner disciplinary process, and new developments in patent and trademark practice.

2026-01-17

Updates on interview practice during patent examination

USPTO

In this session, we focused on Interview Practice and answered questions during a live Q&A. The discussion featured recent updates to examiner guidance for claiming time for interviews, applicant best practices for conducting interviews, and overview of applicant resources for interviews.

2026-01-16

USPTO designates as informative a decision addressing real party in interest

USPTO

In this decision, the Director vacated the decisions granting institution and denied inter partes review after concluding that a petitioner’s failure to provide clarity as to its actual identity proved fatal to its petitions. The Director found that the patent owner came forward with evidence sufficient to put into dispute whether the petitions identified all real parties in interest (RPIs) and the petitioner failed to rebut that evidence and carry its burden to show that it had, in fact, named all RPIs.

Page