Fast-Tracking Your Patent: Track One, PPH, and Age-Based Petitions -

Last Updated: June 17, 2026 by Simon K., Borderless Founder & IP Professional

Have you ever wondered why some patents issue in mere months while others languish in the USPTO backlog for years? With the backlog of unexamined U.S. utility patent applications historically hovering around a staggering 800,000, waiting 20 to 24 months just to receive a First Office Action on the Merits (FAOM) is simply not a viable business strategy for many venture-backed startups and agile corporations.

But must you passively wait in this massive queue? Not at all. The USPTO provides several fast-track examination requests to advance your application out of turn. While there is a myriad of niche petitions, the three most practical and impactful avenues are Track One Prioritized Examination, the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH), and Petitions to Make Special based on age. Let’s explore how to leverage these tools and, more importantly, uncover the hidden procedural traps that can disqualify you if you aren’t careful.

The Premium Toll Road: Track One Prioritized Examination

If you have the capital and need guaranteed speed, Track One is the most powerful tool at your disposal. The USPTO’s statutory goal under Track One is to reach a final disposition (an allowance or a final rejection) within 12 months. Empirical statistics show that Track One applications often receive a first Office Action in just 2 to 3 months.

However, this speed comes with strict financial and procedural demands under 37 C.F.R. § 1.102(e). As of 2026, the fee for a Track One request is $4,515 for a large entity (scaled down significantly for small and micro entities). Beyond the cost, two massive caveats frequently catch applicants off guard:

1. The Day-One Filing Requirement

You cannot decide to use Track One halfway through your wait. For a new utility application, the Track One request must be filed at the exact same time as the initial patent application. If you file the application on Tuesday and attempt to submit the Track One request on Wednesday, it will be instantly dismissed.

2. The PCT National Stage Trap

Are you entering the U.S. from an international Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) application? Beware. Track One is explicitly not available for national stage applications filed under 35 U.S.C. § 371.

💡 The Workaround (Bypass Continuation): A foreign company files a PCT application and wants to enter the U.S. fast-tracked. Because they cannot use Track One for a standard § 371 entry, they must instead file a “bypass continuation” application under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) claiming priority to the PCT. This operational pivot allows them to file the initial bypass application alongside the Track One request on day one, successfully navigating around the statutory restriction.

📊 Forecast Your Track One Budget: Track One fees are substantial and fluctuate based on USPTO fee adjustments and your specific Entity Status (Large, Small, or Micro). Before committing to the premium toll road, calculate your exact upfront filing costs using our interactive tool:

Launch PCT U.S. National Stage Fee Estimator (Interactive Calculator)

The Global Shortcut: Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)

What if you could leverage an international filing to speed up your U.S. application without paying the massive Track One fee?

The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is a fee-free work-sharing arrangement between the USPTO and participating global patent offices (like the EPO, JPO, or CNIPA). If a participating foreign office, or an international PCT search authority, determines that at least one claim in your counterpart application is allowable, you can file a PPH request in the U.S.

Unlike Track One, which demands day-one commitment, PPH offers a window of strategic flexibility. You can file a PPH request anytime prior to the issuance of a first Office Action.

Example Strategy: A company files a U.S. application and a counterpart in Japan. Eight months later—while the U.S. application is still sitting unexamined in the backlog—they receive a Notice of Allowance from the JPO. Because the U.S. examiner has not yet issued a first action, the company can immediately file a fee-free PPH petition. By amending their U.S. claims to sufficiently correspond to the allowed Japanese claims, their U.S. application is advanced out of turn, saving them years of waiting.

The Seniority Advantage: Petitions Based on Age

Did you know that the USPTO honors the seniority of inventors? Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.102(c), if an inventor on the application is 65 years of age or older, you can file a Petition to Make Special. This completely fee-free request advances the application out of turn for expedited examination.

A common misconception is that all inventors on a joint application must be of age. This is false. The USPTO only requires one named inventor to be 65 or older to qualify the entire application for expedited status.

Example Strategy: A tech startup files a patent for a new AI-driven medical device. The inventive team consists of three 30-year-old software engineers and one 67-year-old retired physician acting as a consulting co-inventor. Because the physician is a valid, named joint inventor and meets the age requirement, the startup can file the fee-free petition, allowing their critical IP to jump to the front of the examiner’s docket immediately.

The Practitioner’s Reality: Ranking the Fast Tracks

If you read the official USPTO manuals, these three acceleration options appear equally weighted. However, in the trenches of daily IP practice, their actual utilization rates tell a very different story. Based on my cross-border practice, here is how they truly rank in popularity:

The Undisputed Champion: Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH): By a wide margin, the PPH is the most frequently executed fast-track strategy. When foreign innovators or PCT applicants enter the U.S. National Stage with their core technology, they often already have an allowed counterpart application in their home country. Because we can leverage the Global Dossier to seamlessly verify and import that foreign prosecution history, the administrative burden is incredibly low. Most importantly, the USPTO charges exactly zero government fees for a PPH petition, making it an irresistible, highly efficient shortcut.

The Hidden Jackpot: Age-Based Petitions: The second most common route is the Petition to Make Special based on age. During initial consultations, I make it a strict rule to ask the founding team one simple question: “Is any named inventor on this patent 65 or older?” When the answer is yes, the reaction is priceless—clients often feel as though they have just won the IP lottery. They get to leapfrog the massive examiner backlog for free, completely bypassing the steep costs usually associated with expedited examination.

The Luxury Route: Track One Prioritized Examination: Ironically, the most famous acceleration program—Track One—is the least frequently used among everyday applicants. The barrier is entirely financial. As of 2026, the undiscounted USPTO fee for a Track One request is a staggering $4,515. When added to the standard filing, search, and examination fees, it creates a massive upfront financial burden. For most clients, unless the technology has immediate, hyper-competitive commercial urgency, Track One remains an expensive luxury rather than a daily tool.

The Verdict

Expediting your patent is a highly strategic maneuver that requires flawless procedural execution.

Use Track One for immediate, guaranteed priority, but ensure it is filed flawlessly on day one (or via a bypass continuation).
Leverage the PPH anytime before a first action to capitalize on foreign allowances without paying additional government acceleration fees.
Utilize a fee-free Age Petition if just one inventor on your roster is 65 or older.

Time is the most expensive variable in business. Stop waiting in line and start utilizing the fast tracks.

About the Author & Editorial Policy

Written by Simon K., a Borderless Founder and IP Professional specializing in U.S. and international patent frameworks. He leverages his experience running a remote California S-Corporation to provide actionable intelligence for global founders.

Disclaimer: Simon K. is a patent law professional and consultant, not a licensed patent attorney or registered patent agent. All content is for informational purposes only and does not establish an attorney-client relationship.