This Act establishes a pilot program to expedite the patent examination process for inventions in critical and emerging technologies like AI, semiconductors, and quantum science.
Marsha Blackburn
Senator
TN
The Leadership in CET Act establishes a pilot program to expedite the patent examination process for inventions in critical and emerging technologies, specifically Artificial Intelligence, Semiconductors, and Quantum Science. This initiative aims to accelerate U.S. innovation leadership in these vital sectors by prioritizing relevant patent applications. The program will run for five years or until 15,000 applications are accepted, with provisions for potential renewal. Applicants must meet specific criteria, including not being a "foreign entity of concern," to qualify for this expedited review.
The “Leadership in Critical and Emerging Technologies Act” (or Leadership in CET Act) is setting up a new express lane at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). This bill creates a pilot program designed to drastically speed up the patent review process for inventions in three key areas: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Semiconductors, and Quantum Science. The goal is straightforward: make sure American innovation stays ahead of the curve by giving these critical technologies prompt attention, allowing companies to secure their IP faster and get products to market sooner.
This pilot program is essentially a priority queue for specific technologies. The USPTO Director is required to launch it within one year of enactment and has the authority to waive the hefty fees usually associated with expedited review. For an inventor focused on, say, new electronic design automation tools for semiconductors, or a startup developing a novel foundation model for generative AI, this could mean shaving years off the time it takes to get patent protection. The bill defines AI broadly, covering everything from machine learning and sensory recognition to systems that improve AI safety, making the scope of eligible inventions quite wide.
To qualify for this fast track, applicants have to meet a few strict requirements (Sec. 2). First, the application must be a brand-new utility patent application—no continuations or applications that claim the benefit of an older U.S. filing date. Second, and crucially, the inventor (or joint inventors) can’t have more than four other applications currently submitted under this specific pilot program. This limit is clearly designed to spread the benefit around and prevent one entity from dominating the queue. Most importantly, the applicant cannot be a “foreign entity of concern,” tying the program directly to national security priorities and ensuring that only domestic interests benefit from this expedited process.
This isn’t a permanent change; it’s a controlled experiment. The pilot program will automatically end when one of two things happens: either five years pass from the date the first application is accepted, or the Director accepts a total of 15,000 applications, whichever comes first (Sec. 2). Fifteen thousand slots might sound like a lot, but given the explosion of AI and semiconductor innovation, that cap could be hit quickly. If the cap is reached, the Director has the option to renew the program for another five years or another 15,000 applications. This framework suggests the government is testing the waters to see if this focused prioritization actually yields the desired results.
One thing to note is the significant administrative flexibility granted to the USPTO Director. The bill allows the Director to set specific rules for how applicants apply, how the Office internally processes the applications, and even how applicants can amend their filings or appeal decisions (Sec. 2). They can essentially create a parallel, streamlined system separate from standard USPTO procedure. While this flexibility allows the program to be nimble and responsive, it also means the specific operational details—the fine print that affects inventors—will largely be determined by the Director’s interpretation and subsequent rule-making, introducing a medium level of vagueness into the day-to-day implementation. For the average inventor, this means the exact requirements might change quickly as the program rolls out.