CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854

No More Special Patent Screening for USPTO

Patent office stops
Controversial program
To screen patent apps

The US Patent Office has decided to drop a controversial program that flagged certain types of patent applications for slow-track treatment. As we previously discussed, since 1994 the USPTO had a program known as the Sensitive Application Warning System (SAWS) to deal with “controversial or inconvenient” patents. Patents put on the SAWS track included ones dealing with abortion, AIDS vaccines, suicide machines, smart phones, and anything considered “pioneering.” The details of the SAWS program were kept secret until revealed pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request by attorneys at a US intellectual property law firm. The attorneys became aware of the program when a patent examiner let slip a reference to it. The attorneys said that the intent of the program appeared to be to help the Patent Office avoid embarrassment. The revelation of the existence of the program led to considerable discussion in the patent community.

The Patent Office denied that the SAWS program was actually “secret,” although neither patent applicants nor patent attorneys were informed when their applications were assigned to the program. Concerns about the impact of the program were muted somewhat when the USPTO disclosed that only .04% of all patent applications were routed to the SAWS program. The public exposure led the USPTO to review the program and it recently posted the following notice on its website:

Upon careful consideration, the USPTO has concluded that the SAWS program has only been marginally utilized and provides minimal benefit.

Any patent applications previously assigned to the SAWS program will now be put on the regular track. Patent Commissioner Margaret Focarino said that any future similar “quality-enhancing” initiatives would be “disclosed to the public before implementation.”

We’re glad that the Patent Office made this sensible decision. Secret programs, or even somewhat secret programs, are inconsistent with government transparency and public accountability and are clearly inappropriate when it comes to protecting intellectual property rights.

Related Articles

Buying Rival’s Trademark as Keyword Search Doesn’t Violate Lanham Act

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant in a case in which the plaintiff law firm claimed ...
Read More

What does copyright law have to do with McDonalds ice cream machines?

The US Copyright Office has granted a copyright exemption giving restaurants the right to repair broken equipment by bypassing locks intended to prevent anyone other ...
Read More

What’s Happening with AI and Copyright Law

Not surprisingly, a lot is happening at the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectual property (IP) law. Here’s a roundup of some recent developments ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

call us  206.533.3854