Overview
Patent examiners are central to the quality and efficiency of U.S. patent examination and grant. The way that examiners approach their work, however, is shaped by how the U.S.P.T.O. measures their job performance with “performance credits” for specific tasks. For Fiscal Year 2026, the U.S.P.T.O. adjusted its Performance Appraisal Plan (the FY2026 PAP) which determines how examiners earn such performance credits in conducting interviews with patent applicants. These changes reduce the incentive for examiners to conduct multiple interviews, and could likely impact the interview strategy of patent applicants and practitioners.
The Role of Examiner Interviews
The U.S.P.T.O. has long encouraged examiner interviews with patent applicants as a valuable tool in patent prosecution. The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) expressly recognizes that interviews can help bridge the gap between an examiner and an applicant on substantive issues, and can help to advance examination and to identify patentable subject matter. MPEP §713.
Historically, examiner interviews have often served as an efficient way to clarify issues, test proposed claim amendments, and shorten prosecution by resolving disputes that might otherwise require multiple written exchanges with the U.S.P.T.O.
What Changed Under the FY2026 PAP
Prior to the FY2026 PAP, examiners received one hour of performance credit for each interview held with an applicant. Under the FY2026 PAP, an examiner receives only a single hour of credit for all interviews conducted during a single round of examination. Credit for additional interviews is available only with supervisory approval, or if the application goes into a further round of examination, for example, by the applicant filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) for utility inventions, or a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) for designs, and paying the associated RCE or CPA fees.
Practically, these changes reduce the incentive for examiners to conduct multiple interviews and increases the likelihood that an examiner will schedule just a single interview between the filing of an application and a final rejection or advisory action.
Practical Impact on Patent Applicants
With fewer interviews likely to be available, applicants face a more constrained opportunity to engage and work with an examiner to advance prosecution. Limited access to interviews might lead to increased reliance on written office actions and responses, more back-and-forth exchanges with the examiner, and increased cost and longer pendency of applications.
While a noticeable trend against multiple interviews has not yet become apparent, patent practitioners should plan on only one interview per round of examination, and make the first interview count. Submitting a concise interview agenda to the examiner in advance, which outlines key arguments and proposed claim amendments, can help focus the discussion and facilitate a productive interview. By working with a patent professional having knowledge of such changes to examiner interviews and the below insights, applicants will ensure the best possibility to obtain a positive outcome in the examination of their invention.
Professionals
Anthony Natoli
Associate
