USPTO Extends First Action Interview Program Through August 16 | Blogs | PharmaPatents

The USPTO has extended the Full First Action Interview Pilot Program to August 16, 2012. According to the Federal Register Notice, the USPTO is “completing a comprehensive review of the program, deciding what, if any, adjustments should be made to the program, and whether the program should be extended further or made permanent.” The USPTO is soliciting public comments on the program, and will consider written comments received by August 8, 2012.

The First Action Interview Program

As I wrote in this article, the USPTO promotes the First Action Interview program as a way to advance prosecution, enhance interaction between the applicant and the examiner, resolve issues one-on-one with the examiner early in prosecution, and facilitate early allowance. I have several applications in the program, and agree that it is a useful option for applicants.

Preliminary Results

According to the USPTO, over 2,100 requests to participate in the program have been received since it was expanded to encompass all applications. Of the applications that have been examined under the program, over 35% have been allowed in the first Action.

The USPTO believes that this program offers at least the following benefits:

effectively advancing prosecution of an application before issuance of an Office action
enhanced interaction between the applicant and the examiner before issuance of an Office action
resolving patentability issues one-on-one with the examiner at the beginning of the prosecution process, rather than after a first Office action; and
expedited allowance of an application, relative to standard examination, due to the program’s enhanced communication and shorter time periods for response.

Request for Comments

The USPTO interested in “receiving feedback as to whether the program is meeting the needs of its applicants, and whether any aspects of the program cause applicants to not participate.” In particular, the USPTO has asked for comments that respond to the following questions:

Based on your use of the program, did you experience the benefits of the FAI program set out above? Did you experience additional benefits?
Did the Pre-Interview Communication provide you with sufficient, meaningful information to conduct an effective interview?
How productive is the interview before first action in advancing prosecution?
How would you rate the extent/utility of the information provided in the Pre-Interview Communication and subsequent Office action?
What changes would you make to the FAI program? How would these changes improve the program?
For any application in which you decided that the FAI program would not meet your needs, what aspect of the program made the program unsuitable for the application?
Do you consider the FAI program to be more efficient (or otherwise beneficial) as compared to traditional prosecution?
Should the Office make the FAI program permanent?

A Few More Weeks Of Datapoints?

I am somewhat surprised that the USPTO only extended this program for a few more weeks. Hopefully it will be extended again right away (so we won’t be left in limbo like we were in May), or made permanent.

With only 2,100 requests filed, it will be interesting to see how many comments are submitted, and what suggestions people may have for improving the program, or for making it more attractive. If you have used this program, I would be interested in hearing about your experience.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.