# MPEP § 502.03: Communications via Internet Electronic Mail (email)

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.03

## Section

- **Citation:** MPEP § 502.03
- **Heading:** Communications via Internet Electronic Mail (email)
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** USPTO MPEP / Chapter 0500 - Receipt and Handling of Mail and Papers / MPEP § 502.03

## Text

The Office published a Patent Internet Usage Policy to :
(A) establish a policy for use of the Internet by the Patent Examining
Corps and other organizations within the USPTO,
(B) address use of the Internet to conduct interview-like
communications and other forms of formal and informal communications,
(C) publish guidelines for locating, retrieving, citing, and properly
documenting scientific and technical information sources on the Internet,
(D) inform the public how the USPTO intends to use the Internet, and
(E) establish a flexible Internet policy framework which can be
modified, enhanced, and corrected as the USPTO, the public, and customers learn to
use, and subsequently integrate, new and emerging Internet technology into
existing business infrastructures and everyday activities to improve the patent
application, examining, and granting functions.
See
Internet Usage Policy,
64 FR 33056 (June 21,
1999). The Articles of the Patent Internet Usage Policy pertinent to communications via
electronic mail are summarized below. See
MPEP § 904.02(c)
for information
pertinent to Internet searching, and
MPEP § 707.05(e)
for information
pertaining to the citation of electronic documents. See also
MPEP § 713.04
for
recordation of email interviews.
I.
CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION (ARTICLE 4)
If security and confidentiality cannot be attained for a specific
use, transaction, or activity, then that specific use, transaction, or activity shall
NOT be undertaken/conducted.
All use of the Internet by Patent Organization employees,
contractors, and consultants shall be conducted in a manner that ensures compliance
with confidentiality requirements in statutes, including
35 U.S.C. 122
,
and regulations. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant for the
USPTO to communicate with the applicant via email, communications via email may be
used.
Backup, archiving, and recovery of information sent or received via
the Internet is the responsibility of individual users
n a manner that ensures compliance
with confidentiality requirements in statutes, including
35 U.S.C. 122
,
and regulations. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant for the
USPTO to communicate with the applicant via email, communications via email may be
used.
Backup, archiving, and recovery of information sent or received via
the Internet is the responsibility of individual users. The OCIO does not, and will
not, as a normal practice, provide backup and recovery services for information
produced, retrieved, stored, or transmitted to/from the Internet.
II.
COMMUNICATIONS VIA THE INTERNET AND AUTHORIZATION (ARTICLE 5)
Communications via email are at the discretion of the applicant. All
Internet communications between USPTO employees and applicants must be made using
USPTO tools.
Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will
not respond via email to any Internet correspondence which contains information
subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in
35 U.S.C. 122
.
A paper copy of such correspondence and response will be placed in the appropriate
patent application by the examiner. Except for correspondence that only sets up an
interview time, all correspondence between the Office and the applicant including
applicant's representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If
an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an
interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. The written authorization may
be submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, mail, or fax. It cannot
be submitted by email
between the Office and the applicant including
applicant's representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If
an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an
interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. The written authorization may
be submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, mail, or fax. It cannot
be submitted by email.
For those applications where applicant wishes to
communicate with the examiner via Internet communications, e.g., email or video
conferencing tools, the following is a sample authorization form which may be used by
applicant:
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby
authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in
accordance with
37 CFR 1.33
and
37 CFR 1.34
concerning any
subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or
electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of
record in the application file.”
A written authorization for electronic communication
may not be filed through an email communication. In limited circumstances the
applicant may make an oral authorization for Internet communication. See
MPEP §
713.01
, subsection II.
A written authorization may be withdrawn by filing a signed paper
clearly identifying the original authorization. The following is a sample form which
may be used by applicant to withdraw the authorization:
“The authorization given on______, to the USPTO to communicate with
any practitioner of record or acting in a representative capacity in accordance with
37 CFR
1.33
and
37 CFR 1.34
concerning any
subject matter of this application via video conferencing, instant messaging, or
electronic mail is hereby withdrawn.”
To facilitate processing of the internet communication
authorization or withdrawal of authorization, the Office strongly encourages use of
Form PTO/SB/439, available at
www.uspto.gov/PatentForms
representative capacity in accordance with
37 CFR
1.33
and
37 CFR 1.34
concerning any
subject matter of this application via video conferencing, instant messaging, or
electronic mail is hereby withdrawn.”
To facilitate processing of the internet communication
authorization or withdrawal of authorization, the Office strongly encourages use of
Form PTO/SB/439, available at
www.uspto.gov/PatentForms
. The form may be filed via the USPTO
patent electronic filing system using the document description Internet
Communications Authorized or Internet Communications Authorization Withdrawn to
facilitate processing. The internet authorization must be submitted on a separate
paper to be entitled to acceptance in accordance with
37 CFR 1.4(c)
.
The separate paper will facilitate processing and avoid confusion.
A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT
be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is
on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office
actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed
electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see
MPEP §
502.05
) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given
by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions
under
35 U.S.C.
132
or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such
case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent
Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file
(Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by
applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply
to avoid abandonment under
35 U.S.C. 133
and
37 CFR
1.135
. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the
appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED
entered in the patent application file
(Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by
applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply
to avoid abandonment under
35 U.S.C. 133
and
37 CFR
1.135
. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the
appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.
USPTO employees are NOT permitted to initiate communications with
applicants via email unless there is a written authorization of record in the patent
application by the applicant.
If applicant has authorized Internet communications,
USPTO employees may respond to email and initiate communications with applicants via
email.
All reissue applications are open to public inspection under
37 CFR
1.11(a)
and all papers relating to a reexamination proceeding
which have been entered of record in the patent or reexamination file are
open to public inspection under
37 CFR 1.11(d)
. USPTO employees
are NOT permitted to initiate communications with applicant in a reissue application
or a patentee of a reexamination proceeding via email unless written authorization is
given by the applicant or patentee.
III.
AUTHENTICATION OF SENDER BY A PATENT ORGANIZATION RECIPIENT (ARTICLE 6)
The misrepresentation of a sender’s identity (i.e., spoofing) is a
known risk when using electronic communications. Therefore, Patent Organization users
have an obligation to be aware of this risk and conduct their Internet activities in
compliance with established procedures.
Email must be initiated by a registered practitioner, or an applicant
in a pro se application, and sufficient information must be provided to show
representative capacity in compliance with
37 CFR 1.34
. Examples of such
information include the attorney registration number, attorney docket number, and
patent application number
ct their Internet activities in
compliance with established procedures.
Email must be initiated by a registered practitioner, or an applicant
in a pro se application, and sufficient information must be provided to show
representative capacity in compliance with
37 CFR 1.34
. Examples of such
information include the attorney registration number, attorney docket number, and
patent application number.
Similar to the policy set forth in
MPEP 100
for handling
telephone calls, when responding to an email, no information should be disclosed
until the identity of the requester can be adequately verified. Examiners should
verify the identity of the person by checking Patent Data Portal or the application
file, such as checking the email address previously provided in Patent Data Portal or
the application.
IV.
USE OF ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICES (ARTICLE 7)
Once email correspondence has been received from the applicant, as
set forth in Patent Internet Usage Policy Article 4, such correspondence must be
responded to appropriately. The Patent Examiner may respond to an applicant’s email
correspondence by telephone, fax, or other appropriate means.
V.
INTERVIEWS (ARTICLE 8)
Email and instant messaging shall NOT be used to conduct an exchange
of communications similar to those exchanged during telephone or personal interviews
unless a written authorization has been given under Patent Internet Usage Policy
Article 5 to use Internet email. In such cases, a paper copy of the Internet email or
instant messaging contents MUST be made and placed in the patent application file, as
required by the Federal Records Act, in the same manner as an Examiner Interview
Summary Form is entered.
USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct
examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent
Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be
obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link
or tools
eral Records Act, in the same manner as an Examiner Interview
Summary Form is entered.
USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct
examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent
Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be
obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link
or tools. Authorization is required to confirm that the practitioner is able to
conduct a video conferencing interview and to confirm the email address to which the
invitation must be sent. The practitioner’s participation in the interview is
considered consent to the use of the video conferencing tool for the interview.
All Internet communications between USPTO employees and
applicants must be made using USPTO tools. Video conferencing communications must be
hosted by USPTO personnel. All interviews done by video conference must originate
from USPTO links provided by the examiner. Links provided by the applicant from
non-USPTO video conferencing tools are not acceptable to use for an interview. No
personal phones, email, PDAs, etc. may be used by USPTO employees for Official
communications.
VI.
POLICY GUIDANCE AND CLARIFICATIONS (ARTICLE 13)
Within the Patent Organization, any questions regarding Internet
usage policy should be directed to the user’s immediate supervisor. Non-USPTO
personnel should direct their questions to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for
Patents who oversees the Office of Petitions or assigned staff in the Office of
Petitions, the Office of Patent Legal Administration, and the MPEP Staff Office.

## Nearby sections

- [MPEP § 501 Filing Papers With the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S501.md)
- [MPEP § 502 Depositing Correspondence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.md)
- [MPEP § 502.01 Correspondence Transmitted by Facsimile](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.01.md)
- [MPEP § 502.02 Correspondence Signature Requirements](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.02.md)
- [MPEP § 502.03 Communications via Internet Electronic Mail (email)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.03.md)
- [MPEP § 502.04 Duplicate Copies of Correspondence](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.04.md)
- [MPEP § 502.05 Correspondence Transmitted by EFS-Web](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.05.md)
- [MPEP § 503 Application Number and Filing Receipt](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S503.md)
- [MPEP § 504 Assignment of Application for Examination](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S504.md)
- [MPEP § 505 Date of Receipt Stamp](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S505.md)
- [MPEP § 506 Completeness of Original Application](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S506.md)
- [MPEP § 506.01 [Reserved]](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S506.01.md)
- [MPEP § 506.02 Review of Refusal To Accord Filing Date](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S506.02.md)
- [MPEP § 507 Drawing Review in the Office of Patent Application Processing](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S507.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S502.03. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.