📅 2026 Update: Changes in US Patent Law

Since the original article was written, there have been several important updates in U.S. patent law. These changes affect how patents are applied for, maintained, and processed. The information in the earlier article continues below and provides a solid foundation for understanding these adjustments.

🆕 Patent Fee Adjustments

Effective January 19, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) updated its patent fees. This change aims to support the office's efficient operations and strategic goals. The basic filing fee for utility patents is currently $350 for large entities, with lower fees available for small and micro entities.

🧬 WIPO Standard ST.26 Adoption

On July 1, 2024, the USPTO aligned its regulations with the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) Standard ST.26. This requires patent applications that include nucleotide or amino acid sequences to be submitted in XML format. This update streamlines the application process for biotech and pharmaceutical inventions.

🤖 AI-Assisted Inventions Guidance

Starting February 13, 2024, the USPTO clarified that AI-assisted inventions are not automatically unpatentable. The guidance emphasizes that human contribution is critical in these innovations. This change opens new pathways for inventors working with artificial intelligence.

🏢 Unleashing American Innovators Act

The Unleashing American Innovators Act of 2022 was signed into law on December 29, 2022. This act established new regional outreach offices and increased fee discounts for small and micro entity patent applicants. It aims to help more inventors access the patent system.

📌 Key Changes Summary

  • 🆕 Patent fees have been updated as of January 19, 2025.
  • 🧬 Requirements for nucleotide and amino acid sequences now require XML format.
  • 🤖 AI-assisted inventions can be patented if they include significant human input.
  • 🏢 The Unleashing American Innovators Act supports small inventors through fee discounts.

💡 Tips for Navigating Patent Law

Reviewing your specific situation with an attorney is essential for navigating patent law effectively.

📝 Understand Basic Filing Fees

Be aware of the basic filing fees for utility patents, which are currently $350 for large entities. Smaller entities can pay reduced fees. Knowing these costs helps budget for your patent application.

📅 Track Maintenance Fee Deadlines

Maintenance fees are due at 3.5, 7.5, and 11.5 years after your patent grant. Failing to pay these fees may lead to patent expiration. Keeping a calendar reminder can help avoid missing these important dates.

📡 Utilize the USPTO’s Resources

The USPTO offers numerous resources, including a comprehensive guide to the patent application process. Familiarizing yourself with these resources can simplify your experience.

🆓 Take Advantage of Free Assistance

The USPTO's Inventors Assistance Center provides free help for inventors. This includes guidance on the patent process and fee-related questions. Utilizing such free services can save time and money.

✍️ Respond Promptly to Office Actions

If you receive an office action, respond within six months. Extensions are available but may delay the application process. Timely responses are crucial to keeping your application on track.

🏆 Free Options Ranked by User Reviews (2026)

No national paid services met the review threshold in the patent help area. Instead, this section highlights free government and nonprofit resources that can assist inventors and small businesses.

🥇 1. Inventors Assistance Center (IAC)

The USPTO's Inventors Assistance Center offers free support for inventors. They provide guidance on navigating the patent process and answering fee-related questions. This resource is especially beneficial for individuals new to patenting.

🥈 2. Patent Pro Bono Programs

The USPTO supports regional patent pro bono programs that offer free legal assistance. These programs are designed for independent inventors and small businesses unable to afford legal help. They connect you with volunteer patent professionals who can provide valuable insights.

🥉 3. USPTO Fee Transmittal Form

The USPTO offers a Fee Transmittal form to help submit payments with patent applications. This form simplifies the payment process and ensures that all fees are paid correctly and on time.

4️⃣ Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP)

The MPEP provides detailed guidance on the patent examination process. It is a crucial resource for understanding how patent applications are processed and what to expect during the review.

🔎 What to Check Before Paying for Help

  • 🆓 Look for free resources before paying for services.
  • 📚 Verify if the provider has good reviews.
  • ✅ Ensure the provider has experience in patent law.
  • ❓ Understand what services are included in any fees.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

❓ What are the new patent fees?

The basic filing fee for utility patents is currently $350 for large entities, with reduced fees available for small and micro entities. These fees were updated effective January 19, 2025.

🕒 How long do I have to respond to an office action?

Replies to office actions must be submitted within six months of the mailing date. Extensions of time can typically be granted for two or three months, depending on the office action type.

🔍 Can I file a patent application in XML format?

Yes, as of July 1, 2024, patent applications that include nucleotide or amino acid sequences must be submitted in XML format to align with WIPO Standard ST.26.

📅 What are the deadlines for maintenance fees?

Maintenance fees are due at 3.5, 7.5, and 11.5 years after the patent grant. Missing these deadlines can result in the expiration of your patent.

🤖 Are AI-assisted inventions patentable?

Yes, the USPTO clarified that AI-assisted inventions can be patented as long as there is significant human contribution involved in the invention.

📞 How can I get free help with my patent application?

You can seek assistance from the USPTO's Inventors Assistance Center or regional patent pro bono programs. These resources offer free guidance and support for inventors.

⚖️ Recent Cases Related to Patent Law

Recent court rulings highlight ongoing legal discussions surrounding patent applications and enforcement. These cases connect directly to how patent law is applied and interpreted in the United States.

For more recent rulings, you can check more rulings on the news page.

End of October 2026 Update





The Sherman Antitrust Act was the first statute passed into United States federal law to address the issue of businesses improperly acting in concert with each other to gain unfair advantages over competitors and in regard to consumers. It was passed into law on July 2, 1890. It exists in the United States Code in Sections 1 through 7 of Title 15. Legal scholars and political historians generally consider the first full implementation of the Sherman Antitrust Act to have been during the administration of President Theodore Roosevelt, which lasted from 1901 to 1909. The Sherman Antitrust Act did not directly impinge on patent protection 

The Sherman Antitrust Act came about in an era in which business failures and corruption scandals had created a national mood of disaffection with big business practices. It was felt that the spread of monopolistic practices amongst large businesses had contributed to these economic troubles. 

The law was authored by the Ohio Republican Senator John Sherman, who was then the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and followed in the steps of that state's similar Valentine Anti-Trust Act. The Sherman Act received widespread legislative approval. The legislation was approved by the House on June 20, 1890. On July 2, 1890, President Harrison signed the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Sherman Antitrust Act Overview

The Sherman Antitrust Act receives its Constitutional sanction from the Congressional prerogative to preside over issues of interstate commerce. In this sense, it refers to business activities which cross state lines or in some way involve more than one state. While this inherent limitation of national legislation limited the utility of the Sherman Antitrust Act to some extent, in practice many states which did not already have adequate laws dealing with competition passed new statues modeled on the Congressional legislation.

The legislation was placed in three sections. The first part of the act dealt with the issue of the strict definition for business practices which improperly infringed on the need for competition and furnished specific examples of these rights. The second section of the Sherman Antitrust Act addressed the consequences of business practices in violation of competition laws. 

These first two sections were engineered by the legislators to supplement each other in enforcing all potentially monopolistic practices. In this sense businesses would not have the option of devising loopholes, as had been the response to previous competition laws, which could allow them to be in technical compliance with the law while working against its desired end.


 


As a kind of monopoly, patent registration and other intellectual property rights could conceivably run afoul of the provisions of the Sherman Antitrust Act against the improper control of an entire field. With a view to retaining strong intellectual property rights and thereby ensuring that industrial development could remain a high priority for science, the Antitrust Act specifically provided for the freedom from these laws enjoyed by patent holders. In some areas, however, behavior toward intellectual property rights might be found to constitute infringement of the Sherman Antitrust Act. 

For instance, deception in the course of obtaining the intellectual property rights of patent registration to some process or device might fall under the heading of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This condition was found in the 1965 case of Walker Process Equip. v. Food Machinery Corp., of which the Supreme Court ruled that the patent holder violated competition laws by gaining a patent by giving out invalid information in the registration. Other businesses should have been allowed to create the same device as required under the competition laws of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Another competition law subject related to intellectual property rights concerns the formation of patent pools. In such a practice, the holders of patents in similar kinds of technology decide to forgo competition and cross-license their patent registrations