Summary
Two years after the **US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)** launched a specialized practice bar for design patents, applicant numbers remain critically low. Despite the intention to create new opportunities, particularly for those with backgrounds in design and arts, only **47 people** had applied by February 1, 2026, with just **five registered practitioners**. **Christopher Santone**, an industrial designer turned design agent, is one of the few who navigated the process, highlighting the perceived need for such a bar but also the significant hurdles, including a challenging exam that appears identical to the utility patent bar exam. This situation raises concerns about the bar's effectiveness in diversifying the intellectual property field.
Key Takeaways
- The USPTO's design patent bar has seen significantly low applicant numbers two years after its launch.
- The exam for the design patent bar is reportedly the same as the utility patent bar, posing a challenge for design professionals.
- Only five registered design practitioners are currently active, limiting the bar's immediate impact.
- The initiative aimed to expand practice opportunities for those with design and arts backgrounds.
- The USPTO has declined to comment on the low participation rates.
Balanced Perspective
As of February 1, 2026, the **USPTO's design patent bar** has attracted only 47 applicants since its January 2024 launch, resulting in five registered practitioners. The application requirements, which accept degrees in design-related fields, differ from the traditional STEM-focused utility patent bar. However, the exam appears to be the same, a point of contention for accessibility. The USPTO has declined to comment on the low numbers.
Optimistic View
The **design patent bar** represents a crucial symbolic and practical step towards recognizing the value of non-STEM professionals in IP. Its existence, even with low numbers, validates the unique contributions of individuals with backgrounds in **industrial design**, **graphic design**, and **fine arts**, potentially paving the way for future growth and greater inclusivity within the patent system. The low numbers may simply reflect an early stage, with awareness and interest building over time.
Critical View
The abysmal applicant numbers for the **design patent bar** suggest a fundamental disconnect between the USPTO's intentions and the reality on the ground. The identical exam to the utility bar, which heavily features STEM-centric case law and treaties not directly relevant to design patents, acts as a significant barrier. This failure to attract diverse talent means the initiative may not achieve its goal of broadening IP practice and could be a missed opportunity to inject fresh perspectives into the field.
Source
Originally reported by Bloomberg Law News