Breaking: USPTO plans to cut Russia PCT authority

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Breaking: USPTO plans to cut Russia PCT authority

The USPTO HQ in Alexandria, Virginia

The USPTO has warned applicants not to select Rospatent as a PCT examining authority

The USPTO warned US applicants not to select Rospatent as a search or examining authority under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty today, March 22.

The USPTO sent out an alert stating that applicants should exercise caution before selecting Rospatent as an international searching authority or international preliminary examining authority under the PCT.

Related stories

Doing so, it said, might prevent international applications under the PCT from being successfully processed, including the transmittal of required fees through financial institutions.

A source at the USPTO said the office had issued this warning because it was working with the Department of State to terminate the agreement allowing US applicants to select Rospatent as a search or examining authority under the PCT.

As per the agreement, the termination would become effective six months after formally notifying Rospatent.

This development follows a growing trend of IP offices severing ties to Russia and Belarus in reaction to the war in Ukraine.

The EPO announced that it had suspended its co-operation with the Belarus and Russia IP offices and the EAPO on March 1. The EUIPO similarly cut ties with Rospatent and the EAPO on March 9.

In contrast, the CNIPA said on March 8 that it would extend its PPH agreement with the EAPO.

The update comes just over two weeks after the USPTO ended co-operation with officials from the Russian intellectual property office Rospatent and the EAPO on March 4, and more than a week after it ended its Global Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) agreement with Rospatent on March 11.

 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article