USPTO to Waive New Appeal Fee for Appeal Briefs Filed by March 18, 2013

05 March 2013 PharmaPatents Blog

While most stakeholders are focused on the first-inventor-to-file changes to U.S. patent law that take effect on March 16, 2013, some applicants could realize significant cost savings by taking certain actions by March 18, 2013, to avoid the new USPTO fees that take effect on March 19, 2013. Applicants in the process of preparing Appeal Briefs will be interested to know that the USPTO will waive the new appeal fee if an Appeal Brief and fee are filed before March 19, 2013.

The New Appeal Fee Structure

Under the current USPTO fee schedule, Large Entity Applicants pay the following fees for appeals:

  • Notice of Appeal fee: $630
  • Appeal Brief fee: $630
  • Oral Hearing fee: $1260 (optional)

Beginning March 19, 2013, Large Entity Applicants will face the following appeal fees:

  • Notice of Appeal fee: $800
  • Appeal Brief fee: $0
  • Appeal Forwarding fee: $2000 (due after Examiner’s Answer)
  • Oral Hearing fee: $1300 (optional)

Large Entities in ex parte reeaxamination proceedings will face the following appeal fees:

  • Notice of Appeal Fee: $800
  • Appeal Brief Fee: $2000
  • Appeal Forwarding Fee: $2000
  • Oral Hearing Fee: $1300

The USPTO has announced that it will waive the new fee for forwarding an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in any application or ex parte reexamination where the appellant has filed an Appeal Brief and Appeal Brief fee by March 18, 2013.

As noted by the USPTO:

This waiver avoids the payment of extra fees that would otherwise result when an applicant paid both a fee to file an appeal brief by March 18,2013, and would also be required to pay the fee to forward an appeal on or after March 19,2013.

Thus, Applicants who are in a position to file their Appeal Briefs by March 18, 2013 could save $1370 in USPTO fees by doing so.

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.

Related Services

Insights

California Statute Offers Dramatic Change to Independent Contractor, Franchise-Franchisee Relationships
20 September 2019
Legal News: Distribution & Franchise
AI Ouch! AI Job Interview Law Starting in 2020!
20 September 2019
Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog
RCE PTA Carve-Out Resumes After Interference
18 September 2019
PharmaPatents
The Ninth Circuit Expected to Rule that Doctors Can Be Wrong in the Winter v. Gardens False Claims Act Case
18 September 2019
Legal News: Government Enforcement Defense & Investigations
Lacktman, Ferrante Cited in mHealth Intelligence About Ryan Haight Act
19 September 2019
mHealth Intelligence
Vernaglia Comments on AHA v Azar Decision
18 September 2019
MedPage Today
Tinnen Discusses How Viewpoint Diversity Helps Businesses Thrive
18 September 2019
InsideTrack
Lach Comments on Launch of New Group
16 September 2019
BizTimes Milwaukee
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
BRG Healthcare Leadership Conference
06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.
CTeL Telehealth Fall Summit 2019
04-06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.