35 U.S.C. · Part II · Chapter 12, Examination of application
35 U.S.C. 131: Examination of application
In plain English
Section 131 is one sentence: the Director examines the application and, if the applicant appears entitled to a patent under the law, issues one. Two consequences follow. First, there is no separate request for examination in the US, unlike the EPO, the DPMA or IP India. Paying the filing, search and examination fees with a nonprovisional application puts it in line for examination. Second, the statute puts the initial burden on the USPTO: the examiner has to establish why the applicant is not entitled to a patent, and the applicant then answers that case.
Examination covers the whole application: eligibility (section 101), novelty and obviousness (102 and 103), the disclosure and claim requirements of section 112, and formal matters such as drawings, the oath and the abstract. The examiner searches the prior art, can require information from the applicant that is reasonably necessary (37 CFR 1.105), and sets out the result in an office action under section 132.
Applications are generally taken up in order of their filing date within each art unit. Prioritized examination (Track One) under 37 CFR 1.102(e) moves an application ahead for a fee, if it has no more than 4 independent claims, 30 claims in total and no multiple dependent claim. Petitions to make special are also available, without fee, on the basis of the inventor's age or health (37 CFR 1.102(c)).
Annotation by Raj Sutariya, Co-founder, PatentAssist.ai. General information, not legal advice; the statute below governs.
Text of 35 U.S.C. 131
Current text, quoted from the official United States Code.
The Director shall cause an examination to be made of the application and the alleged new invention; and if on such examination it appears that the applicant is entitled to a patent under the law, the Director shall issue a patent therefor.
Practical notes
Use the time before the first action. A preliminary amendment, an information disclosure statement and an interview request once the case is docketed all shape the first action, and the first action on the merits is the last one where you can amend freely without the application going final.
Under 37 CFR 1.56, everyone involved in filing and prosecuting the application has a duty to disclose information they know to be material to patentability. File an information disclosure statement early (37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98); late statements cost fees or a certification, and an unreported reference can make the patent unenforceable for inequitable conduct.
Track One is worth considering when a granted patent is needed quickly, for funding or for enforcement. Check the current prioritized examination fee and claim limits on the USPTO fee schedule before you file.
Related rules and guidance
- 37 CFR
- § 1.102, § 1.104, § 1.105
- MPEP
- 702, 704, 706
Read next
All annotated sections of 35 U.S.C.
Statute text from the United States Code published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives (uscode.house.gov). Text contains those laws in effect through Public Law 119-124 (October 15, 2026). Editorial notes and footnotes are omitted. The annotations are general information, not legal advice; check the official text and a registered patent practitioner before relying on them.