USPTO Announces PCT Informed Examination Request (PIER) Pilot Program: What Applicants and Counsel Need to KnowApril 23, 2026

Another procedural change has been implemented with the USPTO’s PCT Informed Examination Request (PIER) Pilot Program.  Certain U.S. national stage applications will be selected for participation in the PIER Pilot Program between April 9, 2026 and April 9, 2027.  Applications will be selected from unexamined 35 U.S.C. § 371 filings and will be required to comply with pre-examination processing and response to a USPTO request for information under 37 C.F.R. § 1.105 that directs the applicant to choose to proceed with examination, request a delay of examination (up to twelve months), or expressly abandon the application. Notably, failure to respond results in abandonment of the application.

This requirement to respond to the USPTO confirming intent to proceed with examination (or select other options to prevent abandonment of the U.S. national stage application) is a new requirement in U.S. patent examination procedures. The articulated intent is to reduce patent backlog by having Applicants earlier affirm their intent to proceed. At this stage in pendency, an applicant has already selected to proceed with a U.S. national stage application (and incurred the costs associated therewith), after receiving the International Search Report, Written Opinion, and any International Preliminary Report on Patentability. Therefore, to most patent practitioners, it seems unlikely that a large number of applications would change course and elect to abandon the patent application so soon after filing in the U.S. However, there certainly runs the risk that applicants may fail to timely respond and applications could abandon as a result of lack of responsiveness as an affirmative assertion to proceed is required. There is also a USPTO underlying assumption that applicants facing unfavorable search and written opinion findings, may triage their filings and chose not to proceed.

Notably, this will add an additional cost to applicants. If selected in the PIER Pilot Program, counsel will be required to make a submission to the USPTO. From a strategic and business perspective this also places an earlier decision point on applicants and counsel to again consider the patentability and value of the pending claims, relevance of cited art from the PCT stage, and business priorities all at a sooner time than they otherwise would be required to do. However, for applicants who undertake this earlier assessment with the PIER Pilot Program, they may also chose to submit a preliminary amendment when electing to proceed, providing them an opportunity to align claims in a more favorable manner for efficient prosecution. However, this could be achieved regardless of whether the application is selected for the PIER Pilot Program. Therefore, it seems the only real strategy option that is newly presented to applications under the program, is the ability to defer examination for up to a year, presenting a cost management strategy, such as to coordinate U.S. examination with foreign prosecution or timing of business development related to the pending application. However, it is not clear how this delay option will impact any patent term adjustment. At this time the USPTO has indicated that the requirement for information may stop the Office’s pendency clock, and applicant-elected delay is likely to be treated as applicant delay and thereby reducing any patent term adjustment.

The PIER Pilot Program represents a departure from traditional U.S. practice where examination proceeds without an explicit request to do so (as is required in many foreign jurisdictions). However, this only applies to the limited selection of U.S. national stage entries. Overall, the PIER Pilot Program will shift part of the burden of examination triage to applicants. In the event your application is selected, this presents an opportunity to engage with patent counsel to use the program to consider amendments and/or further delay.

It will take the full year to assess whether there is any substantial impact on reductions in USPTO backlog. During this time, the selected applications will bear the burden of additional costs for assessing options and responding to the USPTO. Therefore, patent counsel will be paying close attention to PCT-derived U.S. portfolios. Applicants selected for the PIER Pilot Program will need to be notified and the pros/cons to be considered. Overall the program appears to have the following Pros/Cons:

PROS

• Encourage efficient portfolio management
• Improve overall USPTO pendency
• Provide another opportunity to refine claims before examination
• Provide an opportunity to further delay examination

CONS

• Additional procedural burden and deadline for applicants
• Patent term reductions could be material in some cases
• Selection criteria for program remain opaque and therefore unpredictable

Notice of the program was published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2026 (Federal Register Notice).

Questions on the PIER Pilot Program or other topics related to PCT filings or international patent protection can be directed to members of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, PLC. Jill Link is a Partner and Chairwoman of the Firm’s Foreign Department and can be contacted at jill.link@ipmvs.com.