Patent system threat detection data

Detecting and mitigating patent threats has directly reduced pendency time for patent applications and saved resources for the USPTO. Below, you’ll find data highlighting the resources saved and fees recouped due to the working group’s efforts to find patent threats and mitigate their impacts.

Falsified signatures

Since June 2023, the USPTO has identified over 3,900 utility and design applications that were initially determined to be impacted by falsified signatures.
Since October 2024, the USPTO has terminated over 3,300 applications due to falsified signatures.

2,200 notices about patent fraud deficiencies were sent.

Erroneous fee assertions and certifications

To date, the USPTO has mailed over 2,200 fee deficiency notices in patent applications in response to false micro entity certifications.
To date, the USPTO has mailed 68 fee deficiency notices in patent applications in response to false small entity assertions.

The USPTO has collected more than $1.8 million for efforts related to patent fraud.

Fee collections

The USPTO has collected over $443,000 in filing fee deficiencies from applicants who filed false micro entity certifications.
The USPTO has collected over $1,378,000 in prosecution fees that were paid in the higher amount due to the updated entity status (for example, extensions of time, RCE fees, issue fees, IDS fees). These are fees that the USPTO would not have collected if the Working Group had not mailed the fee deficiency notices to recoup the appropriate fees stemming from prosecution.

Mitigating threats to the patent system

Examples of responses

In re Yang, Proceeding No. D2024-04 (February 2, 2024)
- The USPTO publicly disciplined a registered practitioner for violating § 11.804(d) of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, which proscribes engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice (including conduct prejudicial to the integrity of the federal patent examination and issuance process), based on the practitioner’s acts and omissions that allowed another person or persons to submit falsified signatures.
In re Yu, Proceeding No. D2025-01 (December 20, 2024)
- The USPTO publicly disciplined a registered practitioner for violating § 11.804(d) of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct based, in part, on the practitioner allowing his assistants to sign his name on patent documents filed in the USPTO and allowing them to attend patent examiner interviews in his absence.

Scam prevention

Find information on known scams, locating a registered practitioner to represent you before the USPTO in patent matters, and avoiding unauthorized practice of law.

Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) decisions

Look up decisions about practitioners who have been disciplined for violations of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, or its predecessor, the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility.

Examples of threats to the patent system

An overview and descriptions of common suspicious activity identified by the Working Group at the USPTO.

Contact us

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.

Email us