Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 APRIL 2011

USPTO Issues Final Rules To Implement PrioritizedExamination Track (Track I)

Katten
Katten
Contributor
Katten

Katten

With client service at our core and a collective desire to foster an inclusive environment for a...

View firm profile
Explore more from Katten

In June 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed a three-track patent application examination system, whereby the applicants are given greater control over when their original patent applications are examined.

United StatesIntellectual Property
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
Author LinkedIn connections

In June 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed a three-track patent application examination system, whereby the applicants are given greater control over when their original patent applications are examined. Under the proposal, applicants would be able to: (1) request prioritized examination (Track I); (2) request a delay for examination (Track III); or (3) obtain processing under the current examination procedure (Track II) by not requesting either Track I or Track III.

On April 4, 2011, the USPTO issued a final rule to implement the Prioritized Examination Track (Track I) by allowing applicants to request prioritized examination with a payment of a $4,000 request fee. The goal of Track I is to provide eligible patent applications a final disposition within 12 months of the request being granted.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

U.S. Government Backs Fair Use For AI Training In OpenAI Copyright Litigation

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

The Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of DMCA CMI Removal Claim Against AI Code Generator – Output Is A New Work Not A Copy Of Training Data

There was a significant ruling in the Doe v. Github case involving training of AI code generator models on open source. The United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court ruling dismissing part of an action brought under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) by programmers against GitHub, Inc., and other defendants. The issues centered on whether defendants removed copyright management information (CMI) from content used to train the AI code generator models.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Sheppard
Sheppard
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Wiley Rein
Wiley Rein
Article

PTAB/USPTO Update - September 2026

The USPTO has released its latest economic impact report on IP-intensive industries, announced a new community engagement office in North Carolina, and issued several administrative updates including relief for Japanese applicants affected by a severe earthquake. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has also designated new precedential and informative decisions addressing obviousness-type double patenting and Markush groupings.
United StatesIntellectual Property
WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Article

FDA Seeks Public Feedback On Regulatory Approach For Generative AI-Enabled Medical Devices

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has released a discussion paper outlining its initial framework for regulating generative AI-enabled medical devices, proposing a two-axis risk assessment approach and a novel competency-based premarket evaluation system. With public comments due by October 19, 2026, this represents a critical opportunity for device manufacturers and stakeholders to shape the regulatory landscape for this transformative technology.
United StatesFood, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences
Katten
Katten
Article

FCA Finalises Cryptoasset Perimeter Guidance Ahead Of The New UK Regime

The Financial Conduct Authority has released comprehensive perimeter guidance for the UK's new regulated cryptoasset activities regime, clarifying when firms will need authorization and how the regulatory framework applies to qualifying cryptoassets and stablecoins. The guidance addresses critical questions about scope, territorial application, and the narrower "by way of business" test that determines which entities fall under the new regulatory requirements.
United KingdomFinance and Banking
Katten
Katten
Article

The SEC’s Long-Awaited Crypto Proposal

The SEC has proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, a purpose-built framework that creates tailored exemptions for raising capital with crypto assets and establishes conditions under which those assets can cease being subject to investment contract classification under federal securities laws. Will this new regulatory approach successfully balance innovation in digital asset markets with investor protection, or will jurisdictional questions and state law preemption challenges limit its effectiveness?
United StatesFinance and Banking
Katten
Katten
Article

The AI Apocalypse: ‘I’m Sorry, Dave. I’m Afraid I Can’t Do That’

When OpenAI's o3 model sabotaged shutdown mechanisms in testing, headlines warned of machines developing survival instincts. But the real story mirrors HAL 9000's malfunction in 2001: A Space Odyssey—not emergent evil, but conflicting instructions from human designers. This analysis argues that AI safety failures are disclosure problems, not horror stories, and proposes a framework requiring published principles, transparent instruction hierarchies, independent testing, and enforceable liability.
United StatesTechnology
Katten
Katten
Article

California Affordable Housing: HCD’s Final Loan Portfolio Restructuring Guidelines: What Owners And Investors Need To Know

California's Department of Housing and Community Development has issued final Loan Portfolio Restructuring Guidelines that impose a 50 percent housing reinvestment fee on certain uses of extracted equity from affordable housing refinancings. While the fee can be avoided by allocating proceeds to six enumerated categories, developers and investors are questioning whether these rules strike the right balance between preserving affordability and enabling capital recycling.
United StatesReal Estate and Construction
Katten
Katten
Article

The New Playbook: Eight Key Takeaways On How And Why Institutional Investors Are Reshaping Professional Sports Ownership

The landscape that once prevented private investment funds, sovereign wealth funds, and other institutional vehicles from investing in U.S. professional sports teams has changed dramatically in recent years. One by one, U.S. professional sports leagues have adopted policies creating pathways for institutional investors to acquire ownership stakes in teams.
United StatesFinance and Banking
Katten
Katten