March 19, 2026
On March 11, 2026, the General Director of the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI), published an administrative order in the Official Gazette establishing the following:
«During the substantive examination of a patent or utility model application, the Institute may issue up to two office actions for clarification, correction of omissions, modification, or, where appropriate, submission of additional information or documentation.
During the substantive examination of an application, the applicant may request a virtual meeting regarding the patent or utility model application.
Upon issuance of the first notice resulting from the substantive examination, the Institute may propose a virtual meeting to the applicant for the purpose of analyzing the obstacles to protection identified in relation to the prior art.»
This represents a reduction from the previous limit of four office actions. Additionally, the administrative order provides the possibility of holding a telematic meeting between the applicant and the authority to analyze impediments to the application, either at the request of the applicant or upon suggestion by the Institute.
Although the administrative order is not entirely clear and could be misleading regarding the applicable law for patent applications filed on March 11 (publication date), since the provision explicitly states that it will enter into force on March 12, 2026, we consider that patents prosecuted prior to that date—including those filed on March 11—will remain subject to the previous framework, under which up to four office actions are allowed.
This reduction may potentially affect patent prosecution practices in Mexico, as applicants will have fewer opportunities to amend their applications to comply with IMPI’s regulations. Furthermore, it remains unclear whether the telematic meeting will be treated as an informal discussion or as a formal procedural step that could ultimately become part of the patent file and, therefore, subject to the applicable legal formalities.
Although the stated purpose of this measure is to reduce the duration of the substantive examination process, it may give rise to several adverse effects that could become evident in the coming months. Moreover, in light of the upcoming amendments to the Industrial Property Law, this provision appears to reinforce a trend toward streamlining the substantive examination process.
In any case, Basham’s team has the experience and expertise to provide comprehensive support and guidance. Considering this reduction, technical proficiency will be key to securing the best results. We will keep a close eye on these developments to ensure our clients benefit from the most effective legal advice and strategic approach.
Sincerely,
José Eduardo