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

FAI: Getting a Head Start in the Prosecution Foot Race

August 15, 2016

Authored and Edited by Nicholas D. Petrella; Naoki Yoshida

The First Action Interview (“FAI”) Pilot Program provides applicants with a head start on patent prosecution by receiving examiner feedback and an examiner interview before the issuance of an office action. In order to be eligible for the FAI pilot program, an application must:

  1. Be a non-reissue, non-provisional utility application under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) or national stage application under 35 U.S.C. § 371;
  2. Contain three or fewer independent claims and twenty or fewer total claims;
  3. Not contain multiple dependent claims;
  4. Claim only a single invention; and
  5. Not have a first Office Action on the merits as of the date Applicant requests participation in program.

After applying for the FAI program, a pre-interview communication that broadly outlines art and rejections initiates the prosecution process. The program includes an initial examiner interview (the FAI) to discuss the application before the issuance of a first office action. The pre-interview communication and interview provide valuable insight into an examiner’s initial positions and, in some cases, the interview can result in an agreed upon amendment that places the application in a condition for allowance before an office action is ever issued. If no agreement is reached during the initial interview, a non-final office action is issued and prosecution proceeds following the typical prosecution process. In some cases, an FAI application can cross the patent prosecution finish line before traditional applications have even started the race.

Through the FAI program, applicants can use the initial interview process to quickly focus their prosecution efforts to their advantage. For example, applicants who are willing to make substantive initial amendments may be able to work with the examiner to secure an allowance on a set of narrowed claims during the interview, while still pursuing the broader, original claims in a continuation application. In other circumstances, the interview might not result in an immediate allowance but still provides an opportunity to preemptively argue against cited art, to identify and respond to specific rejections, and to test different prosecution approaches and their likely outcomes. In many of these cases, particularly where the examiner agreed in principle on allowable subject matter but wants time for a further search, the Applicant can secure an allowance shortly after the first office action reaching the finish line halfway into the traditional prosecution cycle.

In addition to a head start on prosecution, the FAI program can be combined with other PTO programs and policies to further expedite and extend prosecution. Using the FAI program with the PTO’s Track One Prioritized Examination Program provides the same expedited timeline as all Track One applications while also incorporating the beneficial framework of a pre-interview communication and interview. If an application reaches a final rejection, the Applicant can use all available after final procedures, such as the After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0, to make additional arguments and amendments, continuing the race for a patent.

Visit the USPTO's website for additional information on the FAI Pilot Program.

Tags

pilot program

Contacts

Naoki Yoshida
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 6057
Email

Copyright © 2016 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

Lecture

IPIC/McGill Summer IP Course 2026: Understanding Trademarks

July 14, 2026

Montreal

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Claim Disclaimer Derails Instituted IPR in Freightcar America

May 26, 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