Skip to content

USPTO Extends Motion To Amend Pilot Program – Patent

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on

On October 4, 2022, the United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) announced that it would be extending the Motion to
Amend (MTA) Pilot Program at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
(PTAB) for a second time—now set to run through September 16,

The MTA Pilot Program was initiated on March 15, 2019, following
a 5-month period during which the USPTO sought written public
comments on a proposed amendment process in AIA trials. The
proposed amendment process would involve preliminary guidance from
the PTAB on the merits of a MTA and provide an opportunity for a
patent owner to file a revised MTA.2

The Pilot Program provides two options not previously available:
(1) a patent owner may choose to receive preliminary guidance from
the Board on a MTA; and (2) a patent owner may choose to file a
revised MTA after receiving petitioner’s opposition to the
original MTA and/or after receiving the Board’s preliminary
guidance (if requested). See id.

Under option (1), the preliminary guidance from the Board
typically will be in the form of a short paper (or oral guidance
provided in a conference call) that provides preliminary,
non-binding guidance from the Board to the parties about the MTA.
The focus of the preliminary guidance will be the limitations added
in the patent owner’s MTA—notably, it will not address
the patentability of the originally challenged claims. See

Under option (2), a revised MTA includes one or more new
proposed substitute claims in place of previously presented
substitute claims. A revised MTA is required to provide amendments,
arguments, and/or evidence in a manner that is responsive to the
issues raised in the preliminary guidance and/or petitioner’s
opposition to the MTA. Additionally, a revised MTA may also include
substitute claims, arguments, or evidence previously presented in
the original MTA—notably, it may not incorporate any material
by reference from the original MTA. See id.

To note, the MTA Pilot Program is optional. If the patent owner
so wishes, they are able to pursue a MTA in effectively the same
way as the unaltered, pre-Pilot Program process—i.e., if a
patent owner does not elect to receive preliminary guidance or to
file a revised MTA, the AIA practice is essentially unchanged from
the practice prior to the implementation of the MTA Pilot Program.
The only slight difference is that the due dates for certain
later-filed papers will be extended slightly compared to the prior
rules. See id.

The USPTO has published the results of the MTA Pilot Program
through March 31, 2022. A few highlights are shown


Graph V above depicts the final outcomes of 434 pre-pilot and
pilot MTAs that the Board substantively decided. Graph VI above
depicts the final outcomes of the pilot MTAs that the Board
decided, and reveals an uptick in the percentage granted.


Graph VII above further depicts the uptick in grant rate
(calculation includes both granted and granted-in-part).


Graph XIII above compares a patent owner’s next filing based
on whether the pilot MTA requested preliminary guidance. As
expected, a patent owner is much more likely to file a revised MTA
after receiving preliminary guidance compared to not receiving
preliminary guidance.

In sum, the results of the study indicate an increased filing of
MTAs and revised MTAs following preliminary guidance, as well as
increased grant of MTAs during the MTA Pilot Program period.

The USPTO is further considering making the MTA Pilot Program
permanent through notice-and-comment rulemaking, subject to
stakeholder feedback and suggestions on the program and on
amendment practice generally. Given the previous extensions of the
program, it is likely that the USPTO will adopt a more permanent
form of the MTA Pilot Program.


1. See Notice Regarding Extension of the Patent
Trial and Appeal Board Motion to Amend Pilot Program, 87 FR 60134
(Oct. 4, 2022).

2. See Request for Comments on MTA Practice and
Procedures in Trial Proceedings Under the America Invents Act
Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 83 FR 54319 (Oct. 29,
2018); see also Notice Regarding a New Pilot Program
Concerning Motion To Amend Practice and Procedures in Trial
Proceedings Under the America Invents Act Before the Patent Trial
and Appeal Board, 84 FR 9497 (Mar. 15, 2019).

3. See Report on Motion to Amend Study (updated
Mar. 2022).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from United States

When Are Compulsory Copyright Licenses Compulsory?

McDermott Will & Emery

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit partially affirmed a district court’s summary judgment order holding that audiovisual recordings of live concerts do not fall within the scope of the Copyright Act’s compulsory…

Prior “Use Analogous To Trademark Use” May Win

Cowan Liebowitz & Latman PC

You may be able to assert “use analogous to trademark use” to claim priority over someone else who actually made technical use of a confusingly similar trademark or service mark before you did.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *