The USPTO announced they are shortening the time period for delays in patent actions that require justification and higher petition fees, in an update to rule 37 CFR 1.17(m).
The final rule action, published on June 24, 2026, will require additional information and higher fees for petitions filed more than one year after the patent action was due, while the current rule permits two years before imposing additional requirements.
This change will affect critical patent actions including petitions seeking the revival of an abandoned application, acceptance of a delayed maintenance fee payment, and acceptance of a delayed priority or benefit claim.
The USPTO cited concerns that extended delays may not be unintentional, warranting further explanation of the circumstances on the record. The change aims to increase predictability of patent rights by reducing the window of uncertainty regarding whether a patent application or expired patent will be unexpectedly revived.
What You Need To Know
Petitions filed on or after August 13, 2026 will require additional information and higher fees when filed more than one year after the date:
- An application became abandoned;
- A patent expired due to a delayed maintenance fee payment;
- A foreign priority or domestic benefit claim was due;
- An applicable prescribed time limit under the Hague Agreement expired (for international design applications only)
Although the petition fee rates will remain the same, the cutoff for lower petition fees will be shortened to 1 year.
| Before 1 year+ | After 1 year++ | |
|---|---|---|
|
Micro entity |
$452.00 |
$600.00 |
|
Small entity |
$904.00 |
$1,200.00 |
|
Other than a small or micro entity |
$2,260.00 |
$3,000.00 |
+Table 19 to 37 CFR 1.17(m)(2)
++Table 18 to 37 CFR 1.17(m)(1)
While this rule change shortens the period when additional information is required, the USPTO also has discretion to require such information at any time there is a question of unintentional delay. Notably, the additional information must demonstrate that the entire period of delay was unintentional. In their announcement, the USPTO cites In re Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litigation as an example where patents have been held unenforceable based on an inaccurate statement that the entire period of delay was unintentional, underscoring the potential consequences of extended delays in patent actions.
Next Steps for Patent Owners and Applicants
Those who are filing petitions should review their patent portfolios for abandoned applications, missed maintenance fees, or priority claims that are approaching or have already passed the one-year date, but have not yet reached the two-year date.
These petitions should be prioritized to avoid increased fees and the requirement to provide additional documentation of unintentional delay.
The USPTO has also announced that accompanying updates will be made to the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). While there is no official date for the MPEP changes, we will continue to monitor any updates and share them with you.
Our team is available to discuss how this change may impact your patent strategy and to address any questions regarding potential implications for your patents or filings. Contact us today.