The USPTO's New AI Pre-Examination Pilot Program. Helpful or Hype?

The USPTO’s New AI Pre-Examination Pilot Program: Helpful or Hype?

Don't Believe the Hype

The USPTO is going to put some new applications through an AI search and give applicants “an initial communication identifying a ‘top ten list’ of potential prior art issues in need of attention.”

  1. Too soon. I don’t have confidence in an unsupervised AI tool like this. The technology isn’t there yet and will likely give applicants, especially pro se applicants, some misleading and confusing results along with the helpful ones.
  2. Wrong stage. The best use of this kind of USPTO AI tool would be to have it available for applicants to use BEFORE filing, since once something is filed, the scope of allowable changes is limited.
  3. Doesn’t replace a patentability search. This doesn’t replace having a thorough patentability search done before moving forward with an application, and I’m concerned laypersons will think otherwise.
  4. Patent examiners think it’s a problem. From what I’m hearing from patent examiners, it sounds like (a) they think this AI tool isn’t very good yet and (b) that it is the first step in transitioning eventually to largely AI examination. Once again, the AI technology is absolutely not there yet. Can it help? Sure. Can it replace a human examiner? Not even close. (N.b. my master’s degree concentrated in AI, natural language processing, and LLMs.)
  5. Pay to play. Of course, there is a fee to pay to participate in the pilot program.
  6. Propaganda. Don’t buy that line about the USPTO Director’s “commitment to dramatically improve examination quality.” What he’s doing to examiners behind the scenes is absolutely counterproductive to that goal. 

This program could be useful to some applicants, but it’s definitely overpromising and trying to draw attention away from the chaos and poor treatment of examiners happening at the USPTO. It’s almost like the leadership is trying to break it so it can be turned over to a private company to handle. I’m NOT happy about my clients paying the same fees for poorer quality examination, and that’s exactly what’s going to happen thanks to new policies about examiner quotas and limits on their ability to help applicants.

The Text of The USPTO Press Release:

ALEXANDRIA, VA—In furtherance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) steadfast commitment to dramatically improve examination quality, response time, and efficiency, the agency today announced the launch of its Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot (ASAP!) Program. The ASAP! Program will test the USPTO’s internal artificial intelligence (AI) tool’s efficacy for conducting pre-examination prior art searches.  

“To the Senate Judiciary Committee and inventors of all stripes, I promised to ‘lean-in’ to AI,” said John A. Squires, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. “Our ASAP! announcement today is the first of many planned AI pilots designed to help examiners and applicants alike ensure their patents are born strong. Quality starts at filing—and our enterprising examiners have developed a cadre of new tools that re-imagine workflows and attack thorny chokepoints that constrain productivity, throughput, and ultimately quality for new applicants. ASAP! is intended to foster common ground in the first instance. This is us leaning-in. Watch this space.”

The new pilot will provide applicants with an initial communication identifying a “top ten list” of potential prior art issues in need of attention. By generating an AI-Assisted Search Results Notice (ASRN), ASAP! will afford applicants an early opportunity to assess their claims against the prior art before substantive examination. Indeed, the pilot will look to inform applicants of potential courses of first action responses such as:  

  1. Filing a preliminary amendment;
  2. Marshaling evidence for affidavit practice and notice taken by the USPTO;
  3. Requesting deferral; or
  4. Filing petitions, including express abandonment, to seek a refund of certain fees if examination is no longer desired. 

The USPTO will conduct its automated search using an internal AI system that derives contextual information from the classification of the application under the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) system, as well as from the specification, claims, and abstract of the application. 

The USPTO will utilize the pilot results to assess outcomes for pre-examination searches, evaluate the scalability of generating the ASRN, and collect data to inform next steps and companion pilots. To participate in ASAP!, applicants will be required to file a specific petition accompanied by a petition fee.

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USPTO/bulletins/3f63793

Picture of Julie King

Julie King

Julie is a licensed patent attorney and the founding attorney at King Patent Law, PLLC, with over 25 years of legal experience. Her practice focuses on intellectual property, business, and estate planning, and she's passionate about helping clients use IP tools to protect and grow their businesses. When she's not helping clients, you can find her at a live rock show, watching a horror movie, or playing the guitar (badly).
.libutton { display: flex; flex-direction: column; justify-content: center; padding: 7px; text-align: center; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important; color: #ffffff !important; width: 14rem; height: 2.5rem; border-radius: 16px; background-color: #0A66C2; font-family: "SF Pro Text", Helvetica, sans-serif; } Follow Julie on LinkedIn

This content is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, consult with a licensed attorney.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

More Posts

Categories

Recent Posts

Applications Decoded

Tales from the Crypt(ic Requirements): Trademark Specimens and Intent-to-Use Trademark Applications Decoded

Thinking about filing a trademark before you launch? Intent-to-Use applications and specimen requirements are more complex than they appear. Patent attorney Julie King explains what goes wrong and why trademark attorney guidance matters. You’ve got a great brand name. Maybe you’ve designed a logo. You’re getting ready to launch your business or product. But here’s the question everyone asks: Should you wait until you’re actually selling products to file for a trademark? Or can you file now and secure your rights before launch?

Trump trademarks and the Domestic Emoluments Clause

Current Events: Trump Trademarks and the Domestic Emoluments Clause

How Trump Business Ownership of Airport Trademarks Would Violate the Domestic Emoluments Clause: How does the Domestic Emoluments Clause apply to these trademark applications? Who names airports? That’s right, Congress does, for airports under federal jurisdiction, and the states do for state-owned airports.
Trump has asked for the Palm Beach International Airport and Dulles International Airport to be named after him. Given that these applications also cover airport construction, it’s not a leap to think there may be future airports Trump wants to be named “DONALD J. TRUMP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT” and/or “PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,” especially if the proposed renaming of the Palm Beach and Dulles airports doesn’t happen. Note that the trademarks for the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport are owned by the public entity that runs the airport, Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Federal Agency Assignee of United States (D.C. Body Politic and Corporate) ), NOT a private company.