Major Adjustment to the Examination Procedure for U.S. Design Patents: Accelerated Examination Mechanism to Be Fully Abolished

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has officially issued a final rule announcing that, effective August 14, 2025, the accelerated examination procedure for design patents will be completely abolished, along with the simultaneous repeal of relevant regulatory provisions 37 CFR 1.155 and 37 CFR 1.17(k). This policy adjustment signifies a systemic transformation in the application process for U.S. design patents, requiring applicants to adjust their strategies in advance to cope with the new regulations.

Background and Motivation for Policy Adjustment

The USPTO has clearly stated that the core objectives of abolishing the accelerated examination procedure are:

1.Addressing Procedural Abuse: Some applicants have obtained accelerated status through false micro-entity declarations, disrupting the patent examination order.

2.Optimizing Examination Efficiency: Alleviating the backlog of cases and shortening the overall examination cycle by adjusting resource allocation.

3.Maintaining Systemic Fairness: Preventing procedural abuse from the source and constructing a healthier intellectual property ecosystem.

This adjustment is not abrupt. As early as April 17, 2025, the USPTO had already temporarily suspended the acceptance of new accelerated examination requests for design patents, paving the way for this formal repeal.

Implementation Timeline

April 17, 2025: Suspension of acceptance of new accelerated examination requests.

August 14, 2025: Formal repeal of relevant statutory provisions, fully terminating the accelerated examination procedure.

Direct Impacts on Applicants

Significantly Prolonged Examination Cycle

According to USPTO data and historical cases, the duration differences between regular and accelerated examinations are significant:

Increased Risks in Product Launch and Intellectual Property Protection

Rhythm Adjustment Pressure: Products with short lifecycles and rapid iterations need to replan their launch times to avoid losing market opportunities due to pending patent authorizations.

Difficulty in Responding to Infringement: The prolonged examination cycle may extend the "risk window" during which patents are not authorized, increasing the likelihood of being imitated or copied by competitors.

Alternative Accelerated Examination Options

Although the accelerated examination procedure for design patents has been abolished, applicants can still consider the following alternative paths:

AE Accelerated Examination (Accelerated Examination)

• Applicability: Eligible design patent applications.

• Requirements: Submit a request, pay the official fee, and conduct a pre-search of existing technologies, providing a detailed analysis of the   patentability of the current application.

• Characteristics: High demands on the applicant's response speed and cooperation during the examination.

• Special Examination Based on Age/Health

• Applicability: Applicants over 65 years old or with severe health issues.

• Requirements: Submit relevant supporting documents.

• Advantages: Accelerated examination without the need to pay additional official fees.

Strategic Recommendations for Applicants

Early Planning and Layout: For products with clear plans for the U.S. market, initiate the patent application process as early as possible to reserve sufficient time for regular examination.

Rational Utilization of Alternative Options: Evaluate whether eligibility criteria for AE accelerated examination or special examination are met, prioritizing the selection of suitable accelerated paths. For products requiring multinational protection, consider submitting international design applications through the Hague System.

Optimizing Application Document Quality: Ensure the completeness, accuracy, and compliance of submitted documents to reduce the number of supplements and responses during the examination process. It is recommended to collaborate with reputable patent agencies for professional guidance to enhance application efficiency.

This policy adjustment underscores the USPTO's determination to reform in balancing examination efficiency and procedural fairness. It is advisable for relevant applicants to closely monitor subsequent implementation details and promptly adjust their patent layout strategies to cope with the challenges posed by the new regulations.