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

IP Update

PIER Pilot Program - Synopsis

April 09, 2026

By Mary C. Till; Antoinette E. Nibbs, Ph.D.

The USPTO has issued a notice regarding a new pilot program. The notice indicates that USPTO will select certain national stage patent applications for participation in the PCT Informed Examination Request (PIER) Pilot Program.

How will it work?

USPTO will select certain applications from the inventory of unexamined national stage applications.

How is a national stage application selected?

Only national stage applications that have completed pre-examination processing will be selected. Applications filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a), including by-pass continuations (§ 111(a) filings claiming benefit to a PCT application under 35 U.S.C. § 365(c)) and plant, design, and reissue applications, will not be selected.

Can I opt out?

No. Applications entered into the program are at the sole discretion of USPTO. USPTO will not grant any petition to participate, abstain, or be removed from the program.

What will USPTO issue in the selected application?

A requirement for information (RFI) under 37 C.F.R. § 1.105 will be issued in the application, providing 3 options for the applicant. An RFI is considered an action under 35 U.S.C. § 132 for purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1)(A)(i) and 37 C.F.R. § 1.702(a)(1). The RFI will set a 2-month period for reply from the date of the RFI, which is extendible for a period of 4 months, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).

What are the 3 options for responding to the RFI?

1. Proceed with the national phase of examination,

2. Delay the national phase of examination under the program (up to 12 months), or

3. Expressly abandon the national stage application.

What if I just don’t respond?

Failure to respond will result in abandonment of the national stage application. Where the applicant deliberately permits the national stage application to become abandoned, the abandonment of such application is considered to be a deliberately chosen course of action, and the resulting delay cannot be considered as “unintentional” within the meaning of 37 C.F.R. § 1.137.

What is the PTA impact if I delay national phase of examination up to 12 months?

The Office will treat the request for the 12-month delay of examination as a failure of an applicant to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude processing or examination of an application under 35 U.S.C. 154(b)(2)(C)(i) and (iii) and 37 CFR 1.704(c).

If I expressly abandon, can I get a refund?

Because a requirement for information is an action under 35 U.S.C. § 132, express abandonment under 37 C.F.R. § 1.138(d) to obtain a refund of search fees and any excess claims fees is unavailable.

What is the mechanism for responding?

The applicant must use the PTO/SB/478. If filed electronically, the applicant must use the document description provided on the form.

How long will the pilot program run?

The pilot program will run from April 9, 2026 through April 9, 2027. The USPTO plans to evaluate how requiring an applicant who desires to prosecute an application to request examination in view of international phase work products in the application file impacts an applicant’s decision making and application inventory, as well as the quality and efficiency of examination. During or after the pilot program, the USPTO anticipates providing an avenue for participants to provide feedback regarding the pilot program.

Tags

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), patent application, Prosecution Pointer

Related Practices

Prosecution and Portfolio Management

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Related Offices

Boston, MA

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Mary C. Till
Of Counsel
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4125
Email
Antoinette E. Nibbs, Ph.D.
Associate
Boston, MA
+1 617 646 1649
Email

Copyright © Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm’s clients.

Related Insights

Conference

31st Annual UMass Chan Research Retreat

October 14-15, 2026

Worcester

Articles

The SECURE Data Act: A Federal Privacy Framework Moves Forward

June 16, 2026

Seminar

3rd AI, IP, & Legal Forum

June 6, 2026

Shangai

Articles

California Reaches Record $12.75 Million CCPA Settlement with General Motors Over Driver Data

June 4, 2026

Articles

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

May 26, 2026

Articles

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

May 15, 2026

Panel Discussion

Global Patent Strategies & Litigation: An Exclusive Off-the-Record Conversation with Experienced In-House Leaders

May 5, 2026

London

Conference

LESI Annual Conference 2026

April 26-29, 2026

Dublin

IP Updates

White House Releases National AI Legislative Framework

March 23, 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