Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

Rocket Docket: Fast Track to Examination

By Rachel Ackerman & James Aquilina on October 23, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

While obtaining a design patent is often quicker than obtaining a utility patent, current design patent application pendency is often still a lengthy period of time. Based on data released by the USPTO in July 2024 and shown below, over the previous year the average length of time from a design application filing date to the date that a first Office action was mailed was 16.7 months (Figure 1, below). In the month of July 2024, that average had crept up to 17.1 months. In the consumer product space especially, given the sometimes short shelf-life of a product, such a long examination pendency may not be suitable for a design patent applicant.

Figure 1: Design First office Action Pendency Design | Patents Dashboard | USPTO

Fortunately, the USPTO offers design patent applicants a greatly-expedited path to examination, commonly known as the “Rocket Docket.” In 2024, applicants who used the Rocket Docket received a first Office action within an average of just 1.4 months from when the Rocket Docket request was granted, as shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Rocket Docket Pendency from Grant of Request for Expedited Examination to First Action Design | Patents Dashboard | USPTO

Using the Rocket Docket process allows design applicants to receive a first Office action more than 15 months sooner on average compared to the standard design examination timeline.  Further, use of the Rocket Docket expedites all future processing of the application, including any potential appeal. Finally, unlike a “Track One” Request—which must be submitted with the initial filing of a nonprovisional utility application to receive expedited status—there is no requirement that an expedited Rocket Docket examination request be submitted with the initial filing of a design application, thus giving design patent applicants more flexibility on the decision of whether and when to possibly take advantage of expedited examination.

Special requirements to take advantage of the Rocket Docket include the conducting of a pre-examination prior art search by the applicant and the payment of an additional fee.

The Quarles design rights legal team is nationally recognized for its extensive knowledge and practice experience in this complex and important field. For questions about this article or how to incorporate design-related legal rights into your intellectual property portfolio, please contact the author(s) of this post directly or send a message to the team via our Contact page. To subscribe to our mailing list and receive updates that highlight issues currently affect the design rights legal field, click here.

Photo of Rachel Ackerman Rachel Ackerman

Rachel focuses on domestic and international patent portfolio growth and management. She assists with the preparation and prosecution of patents and has experience drafting comprehensive patentability reports as well as performing in-depth research for inventors.

Read more about Rachel AckermanEmail
Photo of James Aquilina James Aquilina

James has extensive practice experience in all aspects of U.S. intellectual property law and regularly counsels clients in the areas of utility and design patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret law, with emphases on rights procurement, portfolio development and management, rights enforcement, and…

James has extensive practice experience in all aspects of U.S. intellectual property law and regularly counsels clients in the areas of utility and design patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret law, with emphases on rights procurement, portfolio development and management, rights enforcement, and licensing.

Read more about James AquilinaEmailJames's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property, Trademark
  • Blog:
    Protecting the Product
  • Organization:
    Quarles & Brady LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status

New to the Network

  • Agha Law blog
  • Woven Legal Blog
  • Bid Protests
  • Contract Claims
  • Federal Procurement
Copyright © 2024, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo