New procedure to expedite the granting of Mexican patent applications

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

New procedure to expedite the granting of Mexican patent applications

Sponsored by

22BashamRingeCorrea_banner.png

Mariana Gonzalez, partner of the Intellectual Property Practice in Basham Ringe y Correa about the new procedure to expedite the granting or Mexican patent applications.

Recently a new procedure was implemented between the Mexican Patent Office (IMPI) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to expedite the granting of Mexican patent applications based on the examination of a US corresponding application, it is the Accelerated Patent Grant program (APG).

In conjunction with the existing Patent Prosecution Highway program (PPH) and the Parallel Patent Grant program (PPG), the APG emerges from collaborative efforts between IMPI and USPTO to streamline and accelerate procedures by exchanging work products. In the case of APG, it is possible to request it even when substantive examination has begun, unlike the PPH that requires that substantive examination has not started.

This program is only available for those patent applications being electronically prosecuted, so if a patent application is still being physically handled a request for its electronic prosecution before the IMPI is advisable.

Moreover, the following requirements should be noted:

a. The Mexican patent application must have a corresponding patent application in the USPTO that has been already granted and published as such.

b. The Mexican patent application should claim priority of a related US application or should share a priority claim, under the Paris Convention.

c. All the claims in the Mexican patent application should sufficiently correspond to those of the US patent application, meaning that format or different practice changes are allowable, but the Mexican scope should be the same or narrower than that of the US patent application. If required, it is feasible to file an amendment along with the APG request to fulfill this requirement. Deletion of claims is permitted.

d. The Mexican patent application has been published and the third-party-observations period (2 months after publication) is over.

For divisional applications, participation in the APG program will be suspended until the initial application is resolved definitively. The acceptance of participation in an initial patent application doesn't extend to divisional applications, so applicants must apply for each divisional application.

If the participation request doesn't meet the criteria, it is possible to reapply.

Expanding the paths to shorten patent prosecution timelines signifies a favorable development for applicants seeking protection in Mexico, enabling them to streamline the process and enhance the patent granting procedures. The APG program presents an appealing avenue for applicants with an US granted patent, supplementing the choices offered by the widely utilized PPH program, so it would be important to consider it when planning a patent strategy in Mexico.

author: 

Mariana Gonzalez, partner of the Intellectual Property Practice in Basham Ringe y Correa

For further information, please contact basham@basham.com.mx

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
The chief technology officer remit, which has been created as the firm is building its litigation team, will include expanding the use of AI in patent and legal work and automating manual processes
Former Hoyng Rokh Moneiger partner Laura Alonso, who brought her team to ECIJA in March, discusses plans to expand further and why ECIJA’s ‘IP DNA’ is helping broaden her work
Amita Haylock discusses building an integrated Asia practice as clients increasingly demand that firms combine IP, technology and data expertise
Gift this article