It’s Episode 32 of the Law & Business Podcast.

Anthony Verna and Wil Jacques talk about the possibilities of a provisional patent application (PPA).  Many potential clients call asking for a provisional without really understanding that the provisional patent application only gives a one-year extension to the deadline of filing a full patent application.

Law & Business Podcast with Wil Jacques

Law & Business Podcast with Wil Jacques

Pros of a provisional:

  • a way to initiate the patent process is because they are cheaper to prepare (because there are no formal requirements) and the filing fee due to the United States Patent Office at the time of filing is only $130 for small entities (i.e., individuals, universities and companies with 500 or fewer employees), which saves you several hundreds of dollars compared to the filing fees for a non-provisional patent application. Indeed, the filing fee is even less — just $65 — if you qualify as a micro entity
  • cost less to prepare from an attorney fee perspective because there are no formal requirements, which means we can focus on disclosing the invention in its full detail while still preparing an exceptionally detailed application that costs a fraction of the cost of a nonprovisional patent application
  • it is a filing that counts in a first-to-file scheme – used to secure an early filing date
  • A PPA is also held in confidence with the USPTO, even if it is not converted to a regular application. More specifically, a PPA will not be published by the USPTO unless a later filed published application or issued patent claims the benefit of the PPA’s earlier filing date.
  • no requirement that a PPA include any claims to an invention.
    • 35 U.S.C. 112 (a). Those requirements can be divided into an “enablement requirement” and a “best mode requirement.” Section 112 (a) specifically states:
      • The enablement requirement
        • “the specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and”
      • The best mode requirement
        • “shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.”
      • In other words, a PPA must disclose enough information that a person having ordinary skill in the same technology would recognize that the invention claimed in a later-filed non-provisional application is described in the PPA upon which it relies. If the PPA description is inadequate and does not meet these requirements, than a later filed regular application cannot claim the benefits of the PPA’s earlier filing date.


  • pre-filing disclosures permitted by the USPTO may in fact disallow patenting in some foreign countries. Furthermore, even in the U.S., if the pre-filing disclosures are made more than one year before the filing date of the provisional patent application, patenting in the U.S. is likewise precluded.
  • Although the initial cost is low, the required follow-up non-provisional filing fee means that the applicant is actually paying two fees to achieve what an initial non-provisional filing might have accomplished.
  • The provisional patent application preserves the date and renders temporary protection but does not fully protect the invention unless and until the subsequent non-provisional filing or conversion filing meets all of the formal requirements for patent protection. Accordingly, some applicants may gain a false sense of patent protection when they in fact may wind up with no protection at all if the latter application or conversion does not meet with the examiner’s approval  (No formal examination and no issuance)