直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Prosecution First Blog

Banding Together Part II: Expanded Collaborative Search Pilots Launched Between USPTO, JPO, and KIPO

November 30, 2017

Authored and Edited by Kevin J. Spinella; Adriana L. Burgy

In May of 2016, we first documented the launch of the Collaborative Search Pilots (CSPs) between the USPTO, Japanese Patent Office (JPO), and Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) in the blog entitled: Banding Together. The bilateral pilots between the USPTO and JPO, and the USPTO and KIPO, respectively, aimed to provide a comprehensive prior art search for an applicant by aggregating search results at two patent offices (e.g., USPTO and JPO or KIPO) prior to the issuance of an office action. The bilateral pilots expired this past summer and were largely viewed as a success. In particular, as a result of the combined prior art search at two offices, fewer RCEs were issued and prosecution time to allowance was reduced.

Accordingly, in view of the success of the CSP, an Expanded CSP (ECSP) was recently instituted on November 1, 2017 between the USPTO, JPO, and KIPO, and will last for three years (i.e., November 1, 2020). The ESCP allows for applicants to petition for participation in the program and receive accelerated examination, and offers numerous other “expanded” benefits or improvements. For example, in contradistinction to the CSP, there is no longer a requirement for use of the First Action Interview (FAI) program, and references cited by each of the participating partner offices (e.g., USPTO and JPO) will be accorded a “special status” and integrated between offices in advance of issuance of any First Action on the Merits (FAOM).

The ECSP also includes several petition requirements for participation. For example, petitions must be filed using form PTO/SB/437 in partner offices within fifteen days of each other, and must be submitted prior to any examination on the merits. Each petition also requires a claim correspondence table, and only requires correspondence between independent claims, an improvement upon the CSP.  No petition fee is required. Further, the US application must contain 3 or fewer independent claims and 20 or fewer total claims; no multiple claims can be included.  Upon granting of a petition that satisfies the foregoing requirements, each office will next conduct a prior art search, and will then exchange search results prior to issuing an office action from each office to the applicant.

For applicants that file applications in both the USPTO and JPO or KIPO, the ECSP offers an even more effective means for expedited examination as well as enhanced examination quality, including fewer RCEs and shorter examination time. Petition requests, however, will be granted for only 400 applications per year. Thus, prior to filing a PTO/SB/437, applicants may want to prioritize applications in their portfolio before deciding whether or not to participate in the program.

For more information, including details on requirements and advantages of the ECSP program, visit Cooperation for an Expanded Collaborative Search Pilot with the JPO and KIPO and/or the Federal Register Notice.

Tags

Collaborative Search Pilot Program (CSP), Japan Patent Office (JPO), Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)

Related Practices

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Contacts

Adriana L. Burgy
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4345
Email

Copyright © 2017 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

Banding Together 2026

June 18, 2026

Washington, DC

At the PTAB Blog

IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

Conference

Best Practices and Tech in Intellectual Property Conference 2026

May 17, 2026

Tel Aviv

Seminar

IP Strategy at the Crossroads: Technology, Enforcement, and Contracts

May 15, 2026

Taipei

Articles

COPPA’s Amended Rule Is Now in Full Effect: What Operators Need to Know

May 15, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

When “and” and “e.g.” Matter: Federal Circuit Revives VLSI vs. Intel Case

May 14, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP