Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
The site is secure. A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Threat mitigation requires that the USPTO take steps to prevent misrepresentation and fraud in patent application proceedings before the USPTO. The public has a strong interest in seeing that U.S. patents are free from misrepresentation and fraud. Examples of how the USPTO is responding to known threats are shown below.
Each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a duty of candor and good faith in dealing with the USPTO. “[N]o patent shall be granted on an application in connection with which fraud on the Office was practiced or attempted . . . .” 37 CFR 1.56.
Applicants and practitioners have a duty of reasonable inquiry, and a duty to ensure that representations are truthful and nonfrivolous. 37 CFR 11.18. All representations made by submission of documents to the USPTO are subject to Rule 11.18.
Violations of 37 CFR 11.18(b)(2)(i)-(iv) may result in such sanctions as deemed appropriate by the USPTO Director. 37 CFR 11.18(c). Any practitioner violating the provisions of 37 CFR 11.18 may also be subject to disciplinary action. 37 CFR 11.18(d).
Under 37 CFR 1.4, signatures on papers submitted to the USPTO must be personally inserted by the named signatory, and the USPTO may require evidence of the authenticity of a signature.
The requirement for a proper signature on papers submitted to the USPTO, in which the signature actually identifies the party who is responsible for the papers, is necessary for the USPTO to perform its statutorily-mandated duty of examining patent applications and issuing patents that comply with U.S. patent law.
A signature that is entered by a person other than the named signatory is a falsified signature. In instances in which it was determined that a falsified signature was presented, sanctions under 37 CFR 11.18(c) have been imposed, including termination of the proceedings.
The USPTO may require ratification of a signature when there is reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the signature, or where the signature and typed or printed name do not clearly identify the person signing. 37 CFR 1.4(h).
Patent applicants and owners may qualify for small entity or micro entity status allowing for a discount on most patent-related fees. For more information on small entity and micro entity status, please visit our Save on fees with small and micro entity status webpage and our Micro entity status webpage.
False certifications and assertions to receive a discounted fee status unjustly diminish the resources of the USPTO and thereby impede the examination of other applications.
The USPTO has experienced a significant increase in applications claiming micro-entity status. A significant number of such applications have included false micro entity certifications filed by applicants who are not eligible for micro-entity status.
False certifications or assertions of discounted fee status unjustly diminish the resources of the USPTO and thereby impede the examination of other applications. If an issue with micro entity or small entity status is identified, a fee deficiency notice is mailed to the applicant requiring them to pay the deficiency or explain the basis for why they are entitled to micro or small entity status.
When a particular practitioner is responsible for numerous applications with false micro entity certifications or small entity assertions, the Working Group will refer the practitioner to the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) for investigation. See 37 CFR 11.18 (c)(2) and (d)
The USPTO has disciplined practitioners for violating the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct based on a failure to comply with § 11.18:
See, for example, In re Che-Yang Chen, Proceeding No. D2024-01 (USPTO March 20, 2024); In re Zhihua Han, Proceeding No. D2022-23 (USPTO January 6, 2023); In re Kanakia, Proceeding No. D2023-25 (USPTO May 8, 2023); In re Li, Proceeding No. D2023-19 (USPTO April 19, 2023); In re Wu, Proceeding No. D2023-24 (USPTO April 7, 2023); In re McNally, Proceeding No. D2023-22 (USPTO April 7, 2023); In re Chew, Proceeding No. D2023-08 (USPTO January 20, 2023).
The UAIA requires the USPTO to assess a penalty of not less than three times the amount that an entity failed to pay the USPTO when the entity is found to have falsely made an assertion or certification of small or micro entity status, unless due to a good faith error. 35 U.S.C. 41(j); 35 U.S.C. §123(f). The USPTO may also assess a penalty greater than three times the amount an entity failed to appropriately pay the USPTO when an entity has falsely made an assertion or certification of small or micro entity status. 35 U.S.C. 41(j) and 123(f) specifically state that the penalty is in addition to other penalties available under law.
Applicants and practitioners should ensure their small entity status assertions or micro entity status certifications are correct.
Bad actors have used technology to electronically file high volumes of spurious patent applications with no intent to pursue patent protection. Typically, no fees are ever paid in these applications, and in many instances the disclosures are unintelligible. Pre-examination processing of these applications is a significant waste of resources. The Working Group is taking steps to address these applications.
Representation of others before the USPTO must be in compliance with the rules. 37 CFR 11.6, 11.7, 11.9, and 11.10(a). Some applicants are using individuals or entities who are not authorized to represent them before the USPTO (that is, they’re engaging in the unauthorized practice of law). These individuals or entities are preparing and filing papers in patent applications (e.g., amendments) in violation of USPTO rules.
The USPTO is responding to such activity and will work across the agency to prevent the unauthorized representation of others in patent matters. Please see the USPTO’s Practitioner Finder webpage to search or locate active patent practitioners with licenses to practice before the USPTO.
Non-practitioner assistants must be under the supervision of a practitioner to assist the practitioner in matters pending or contemplated to be presented before the USPTO. 37 CFR 11.5(b).
A person who is not recognized to practice before the USPTO and holds himself out or permits himself to be held out as so recognized, or as being qualified to prepare or prosecute patent applications, shall be fined not more than $1,000 per offense. See 35 USC 33.
The USPTO has disciplined practitioners for violating the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct based on engaging in unauthorized practice before the Office in patent matters and for assisting others in engaging in such unauthorized practice:
See, for example, In re Afamefuna Okeke, Proceeding No. D2024-18 (USPTO January 6, 2025); In re Kley Achterhof Proceeding No. D2017-24 (USPTO November 18, 2019).
The Patent Fraud Detection and Mitigation Working Group represents the USPTO's commitment to protecting the integrity of the patent system and raising awareness of filing scams. If you believe that one of the above-mentioned activities is occurring in your application(s), you can contact the working group at patentscams@uspto.gov.
