So you’ve been working on your patent. You filed it. You got that first Office Action. You replied. And then… you got a Final Rejection. Oof. Now what? That’s the moment many founders and inventors hit a wall. You’re building something real. You want to protect it. But now the patent office is saying “No.” And you’re left wondering if this is the end of the road.
What AFCP 2.0 Really Is—and Isn’t
A Free Shot at Getting Your Patent Allowed
AFCP 2.0 stands for “After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0.” It sounds like something from NASA. But really, it’s a simple idea.
After you get a Final Rejection, you’re normally out of chances unless you pay for more. But AFCP 2.0 gives you one last, free shot.
It’s a program the USPTO created to help examiners work with you—without needing to start over.
If you make a real effort to fix the issues in your application, the examiner can take extra time to look again.
Not just glance at it, but really consider your changes.
Think of it like a second look before the door closes.
The key here is “after final.” That’s the moment where most people either give up or throw money at more filings.
But AFCP 2.0 is a smarter move—if you use it right.
What Makes AFCP 2.0 Different
When you respond under AFCP 2.0, you’re asking the examiner to take more time than usual.
You’re giving them a reason to reconsider your claims, based on new arguments or tweaks that don’t shift the whole invention.
The examiner gets a little more time than normal to review your response.
\If they think your changes fix the issue, they can allow your application. Boom—patent granted.
But there’s a catch.
AFCP 2.0 only works if your changes are small. You can’t bring in big new ideas. You can’t try a whole new invention.
It’s for fine-tuning. Think of it like adjusting the lens, not changing the whole camera.
If your amendments are too broad or too complex, the examiner won’t have the time to deal with them.
In that case, they’ll probably just say “No time under AFCP” and you’re back to square one.
That’s why AFCP 2.0 is best used when you’re close.
If your last rejection was more about clarity or narrowing things slightly, this move can save you months and thousands of dollars.
When to Use It
You use AFCP 2.0 when you think the examiner is close to allowing your patent. When your changes are tight and focused.
And when you want to avoid more fees and delays.
It’s not for every situation. If the rejection was harsh or fundamental, AFCP 2.0 probably won’t help.
But if your changes are surgical—and your arguments sharp—it’s a great first move.
If the examiner agrees with your tweaks, they can allow the case.
If not, they’ll usually offer an interview. That’s still a win. Because now you’re talking directly, not just on paper. And that’s powerful.
A quick conversation can unlock everything.
That’s one of the hidden values of AFCP. It opens the door to a real back-and-forth.
You can learn exactly what’s missing, and decide your next step from a smarter place.
How to Get It Right
To make AFCP work, you need to:
Make focused changes
Keep it clear and short
Show why your new version solves the examiner’s issue
Stay within the original invention
Basically, make their life easy.
Patent examiners are busy. AFCP gives them a little extra time—but not a ton. If you bury them in pages of changes, they’ll just pass.
But if you give them a clean, thoughtful response, they just might give you that green light.
And that’s a win worth chasing.
What an RCE Actually Does
Hit the Reset Button—But Not All the Way
RCE stands for Request for Continued Examination. It sounds intense.
But all it means is: “Hey USPTO, I want to keep working on this. Let’s keep the conversation going.”
When your patent application hits a Final Rejection, you’re not technically allowed to keep arguing forever.
You’re supposed to either appeal, abandon, or start over. But an RCE lets you pay a fee to keep the file open.
It doesn’t wipe the slate clean. It’s not a brand-new application.
But it does give the examiner permission to keep reviewing your changes and arguments as if the rejection never happened.
It’s like saying, “Let’s pretend that last Office Action wasn’t final. Let’s treat it like another round.”
That’s powerful. Because it lets you submit new claim amendments, new arguments, or even new evidence.
And it gives the examiner the time and room to really look at it.
Why You Might Want to Use an RCE
Here’s where things get real. If your examiner rejected your last response under AFCP, or if AFCP wasn’t even an option because your changes were too complex—RCE is your next move.
It gives you full examination rights again. That means the examiner isn’t time-limited like under AFCP.
They can fully consider everything you put in. You’re back in the game, with a real shot at getting your claims allowed.
And here’s the key: a well-crafted RCE can lead to allowance faster than starting over. You don’t lose your filing date.
You don’t give up your place in line. And you don’t have to go through the same hoops again.
You just keep pushing forward.
But—there’s a price. Literally.
What It Costs (and Why It Might Still Be Worth It)
RCE isn’t free. There’s a fee. And if you need to file more than one, those fees go up.
But in startup terms, it’s still cheaper than abandoning your IP. Losing patent rights can cost you more in the long run.
Especially if you’ve already done the hard work of filing, responding, and narrowing your claims.
With an RCE, you get another chance to win.
More importantly, you also get a chance to adjust your strategy. You can talk with the examiner. You can revisit your claims.
You can respond to new issues. And you do all that without walking away from everything you’ve built.
If you’re serious about protecting your invention, this is often the smartest move when AFCP doesn’t work.
When to Use an RCE
RCE is your go-to when you’ve hit a wall but aren’t ready to appeal. Or when you tried AFCP and it didn’t lead to allowance.
Or when your changes are too big for AFCP, but you still want to stay in the same application.
It’s also helpful when you want to have more control over the next steps.
You can reshape your claims, present new arguments, or clean up old problems—on your terms.
A well-timed RCE is like pausing the game, adjusting your strategy, and stepping back in with a better chance to score.
It’s not always fun to pay the fee. But it’s often the shortest path to “allowed.”
And when your patent matters to your business, time is money.
What Happens After You File It
Once your RCE is filed, the examiner reopens prosecution. That means they’ll read your new submission, and give you another Office Action.
It could be a new rejection. Or—it could be an allowance.
The clock resets. You’re back in the cycle.
But now, you’ve got more control. You’ve seen how they think. You’ve already gone one or two rounds.
You can tighten your arguments. You can laser in on what works.
You’re not guessing anymore.
You’re making progress.
And that’s the real win.
What It Really Means to Appeal a Rejection
Turning the Tables on the Examiner
Appeal sounds scary. Like you’re suing someone. Or heading into a courtroom. But in the world of patents, it’s not that dramatic.
Appeal just means this: you believe the examiner is wrong, and you want a second opinion.
That second opinion comes from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
It’s a group of experienced patent judges who aren’t part of your original review process.
They look at your application, your claims, and the examiner’s reasons for rejection—and they decide who’s right.
No courtrooms. No suits. No drama. Just smart people reviewing the facts.
When you file an appeal, you’re saying, “I’ve done everything I can with this examiner. Now I want someone else to weigh in.”
And sometimes, that’s exactly what you need.
Why Founders Shouldn’t Fear Appeals
Here’s the truth: appeals aren’t some last-ditch move.
They’re a real, valid strategy—especially when you’ve made strong arguments, but the examiner won’t budge.
Some examiners dig in. No matter how well you respond, they keep rejecting. You tweak your claims, clarify your wording, show the differences—and they still say no.
That’s when an appeal can save you.
Appeals put your case in front of a fresh set of eyes. These judges don’t have a stake in the original rejection.
They just look at the law, the facts, and your invention.
If the rejection doesn’t hold up, they can reverse it. That means your patent gets allowed—sometimes without you needing to change a single word.
That’s a win you can’t always get through back-and-forth with the examiner.
How Long It Takes—and What It Costs
Appeals take time. They’re not fast. Once you file, it could be 12 to 18 months before you get a decision. That’s the tradeoff.
You’re not paying for more examination time. You’re paying for a panel of experts to dig deep. And that kind of deep review takes time.
Cost-wise, appeals aren’t cheap—but they’re also not sky-high. For a startup, they’re a serious investment.
But in many cases, they cost less than giving up and re-filing everything from scratch.
More importantly, they can get you a decision that sticks.
If the PTAB sides with you, that’s the end of the debate. You don’t need to go back and forth anymore. Your claims are allowed.
Appeals are about finality. And sometimes, clarity.
That can be worth waiting for.
When It’s the Right Move
You don’t jump to appeal right away. You try AFCP. You try RCE. You have interviews. You make your best arguments. You do the work.
But if the examiner keeps saying no—even when you know you’ve got a good invention—then it’s time.
Appeal is your way of saying, “We’ve tried. Now we need a real judgment.”
This is especially smart when:
You believe the rejection is based on a misreading of the law
You think the prior art doesn’t match your invention
You’ve already made the best claim amendments you can
You’ve gotten stuck in the same argument loop
You want closure
In these moments, appealing isn’t giving up—it’s stepping up.
And many founders don’t realize how often appeals win. A large percentage of appeals end in at least a partial reversal.
That means the PTAB agrees, at least in part, that the examiner got it wrong.
And in the world of patents, even a partial win can mean you get what you need to move forward.
Appeal is not a stall tactic. It’s a bold play. It says, “We believe in this. And we’re ready to prove it.”
AFCP 2.0 vs. RCE vs. Appeal: What’s the Right Move?
Every Option Has a Job to Do
All three of these strategies—AFCP 2.0, RCE, and Appeal—are about one thing: keeping your patent application alive.
But they’re not the same tool. You don’t just pick one randomly.
You pick based on where you are in the process, how strong your arguments are, how much time you have, and how much you want to invest to win.
So let’s make it crystal clear.
AFCP 2.0 is your quick shot.
RCE is your flexible do-over.
Appeal is your higher court.
Each one serves a different purpose, and knowing when to use which is what separates a smart patent strategy from an expensive guessing game.
Use AFCP 2.0 When You’re Close
If you’ve just gotten a Final Rejection, and your changes are simple—AFCP 2.0 is your move.
You’re not trying to rewrite your whole invention. You’re just tightening things up. Clarifying a claim.
Fixing language. Pointing out that, yes, your invention is actually different from what’s already out there.
It costs nothing extra. It gives you a shot at an allowance. And if it doesn’t work, you can still pivot to an RCE or an appeal.
That’s why smart founders use AFCP first. It’s the easiest “yes” in the playbook—if your case is close.
Use RCE When You Need More Room to Work
Sometimes, your response just won’t fit into the AFCP box. Your edits are too big. Your arguments too long. Or the examiner just didn’t bite.
That’s when an RCE makes sense.
An RCE gives you space. You’re not rushing to squeeze everything into a small window. You’re back in full examination mode.
The examiner can take the time to really understand your new version.
Yes, there’s a fee. But the upside is big: you stay in control of the file. You get another round.
And you might not need to wait a year and a half for a decision—like you would with an appeal.
Many patent applications get allowed after an RCE. Especially when the previous rejections were borderline.
Use Appeal When You’ve Hit a Wall
If you’ve already done your best work—tightened your claims, made your arguments, even tried to collaborate—and the examiner still won’t budge, you go higher.
You file a Notice of Appeal.
Because at that point, it’s not about fixing your invention. It’s about fixing the decision. And that takes a fresh set of eyes.
Appeal isn’t about speed. But it’s about standing firm when you know you’re right.
And when the PTAB agrees with you, that result carries real weight. You’re not hoping for approval. You’re earning it.
How Founders Can Think About Strategy
Here’s the simplest way to look at it:
Start with AFCP 2.0 if your changes are small.
Move to RCE if you need more space to argue.
Go to appeal if your arguments are solid, but the examiner won’t change.
This isn’t just about which path is fastest or cheapest. It’s about matching the tool to the situation.
AFCP is great—but only when you’re nearly there. RCE is flexible—but can drag on. Appeal is powerful—but takes patience.
So ask yourself:
How close am I to allowance?
Is the examiner being reasonable?
Are my changes big or small?
How fast do I need this patent?
What’s the cost of waiting?
How confident am I in my arguments?
Your answers will point you in the right direction.
And the good news? You’re not locked in. You can try one strategy, then pivot if needed. That’s the beauty of this process. It gives you options.
And PowerPatent is built to help you make the smartest move at every step.
Want to see how this works in action?
Real Moves, Real Outcomes: How to Play It Smart
The AFCP 2.0 Sweet Spot
Let’s say you’ve gotten a Final Rejection, and the issue is that your claims are just a little too broad.
The examiner says your invention overlaps with an earlier patent. But you know your tech is different—you just didn’t describe it tightly enough.
This is the perfect time for AFCP 2.0.
You go back in, narrow your claims slightly, and explain how your changes make your invention clearly different. Not a whole new idea—just sharper.
The examiner now has the authority to take extra time to review that. If your tweaks are clean and your argument makes sense, they might just allow it.
No fee. No delays. Just smart strategy.
And if they don’t allow it? You’ve still opened the door for a quick interview, which often unlocks exactly what they’re looking for.
That’s how AFCP 2.0 quietly wins.
Where RCE Becomes the Best Investment
Now picture a different situation. You tried AFCP, but the examiner said your amendments were too much.
Or maybe you didn’t even bother with AFCP because you knew your changes were substantial.
You’ve rewritten some claims. Maybe you’ve added data or explained your product’s functionality more clearly. You need a full round of review, not just a quick look.
This is where an RCE makes sense.
You pay the fee. The case reopens. The examiner takes a new look, with fresh material to consider.
You might get another rejection—but now you’re inside the normal examination cycle again. You can argue.
You can adjust. You can move closer to allowance with each response.
That back-and-forth is what leads many cases to finally get allowed. Especially if you’ve been honest and collaborative throughout.
This isn’t just about pushing paper. It’s about showing the examiner, step by step, why your invention is worth protecting.
How Appeal Can Flip the Game
Here’s the most frustrating scenario: you’ve responded clearly, narrowed claims, even had an interview.
But every time, the examiner rejects you for the same reason.
And that reason? It’s weak. Maybe they’re misreading prior art. Maybe they’re stuck on a technicality. Maybe they’re just being too conservative.
Now’s the time to appeal.
You file a Notice of Appeal. You build your written brief, showing exactly where the examiner’s logic breaks down.
You keep it factual. Crisp. Clear.
And then you wait.
Months later, the PTAB issues a decision. And they say: “We reverse the examiner’s rejection.”
That’s it. Your patent is allowed. You didn’t change a thing—because you didn’t need to. The law was already on your side. You just had to escalate.
This isn’t rare. It happens often. And when it does, it gives you a level of certainty that back-and-forth with the examiner never could.
Appeal is a strong move when done confidently.
And that’s why founders shouldn’t avoid it—they should use it when it matters.
Founders Who Win Use All Three
The smartest founders aren’t married to one path. They treat AFCP, RCE, and Appeal like tools in a toolbox.
They try AFCP first to keep momentum.
They pivot to RCE when things get complex.
They appeal when it’s time to call out bad logic.
And with the right support, they don’t have to guess which to use.
PowerPatent makes these decisions easier—because we use real data and real attorney insights to guide every move.
It’s not about throwing more money or paperwork at the problem. It’s about knowing what works and when.
Want to see how these tactics play out on real patent applications?
Get a walkthrough of the PowerPatent platform →
Pro-Level Moves: How to Maximize Each Strategy
How to Make AFCP 2.0 Actually Work
AFCP 2.0 can feel like a Hail Mary. It’s free, so people just throw in a response and hope for the best.
But that’s not how you win.
You have to treat AFCP like a surgical strike.
Start by reviewing the examiner’s final rejection. Don’t guess. Read every sentence like it’s a code.
What are they really saying? Is it about prior art? About unclear language? About function vs. structure?
Once you find the real issue, ask yourself: “Can I fix this with a focused amendment?”
If yes, then draft a response that hits only that target. No extra noise.
No broad re-writes. Just a clean, narrow fix that shows respect for the examiner’s time—and makes the job easy for them.
Even better? Pair that submission with a polite request for an interview.
Because sometimes, the fix you think solves the problem… doesn’t.
And a 15-minute call can save you 6 months of back-and-forth.
Founders who treat AFCP like a conversation—not just a shot in the dark—see the best outcomes.
That’s how you turn a maybe into a yes.
How to Set Up a Killer RCE
Most people file RCEs like they’re filing taxes. Form, fee, done.
But that’s lazy. And it wastes your shot.
A smart RCE is built like a pitch.
Before you file, look at the whole file history. Not just the rejection—but your last response, and how the examiner replied.
What arguments landed? Which ones bounced?
Then use the RCE to tell a new, tighter story. Clean up your claim language. Add supporting examples if needed.
Address the rejection directly, with facts that can’t be brushed off.
Make it obvious that you’re not just trying again—you’re moving forward.
And don’t forget: use this moment to request another interview.
Examiners are people. If you can walk them through your logic and your changes, you have a much better shot at getting a “yes.”
Don’t just submit. Show up.
That’s the difference between delay… and progress.
How to Win on Appeal Without Wasting Time
The worst appeal briefs are emotional. Long, rambling arguments about how the examiner “missed the point.”
That doesn’t work.
An effective appeal is sharp. It sticks to the law. It calls out errors clearly—without blaming the examiner or complaining.
Start by breaking down the rejection. Is it based on flawed logic? Misapplied prior art? A misunderstanding of your claim language?
Then build your appeal around those facts. One by one, take down the rejection like a checklist.
Support your points with citations. Not filler.
And get help.
Appeals require precision. If you’ve never written one before, don’t wing it.
This is where an experienced patent attorney (or a platform that connects you with one) makes a big difference.
Because when you present your case clearly, professionally, and with respect for the process, the PTAB listens.
They don’t care about emotion. They care about correctness.
And if you’re right—they’ll say so.
One Strategy Doesn’t Fit All—And That’s the Point
Maybe your startup is racing to secure funding, and you need a quick allowance.
Maybe you’re playing the long game and protecting deep tech over a 10-year roadmap.
Maybe you just need to block a competitor from copying your invention while you launch.
Each of those situations calls for a different strategy.
And that’s why PowerPatent exists—to help you navigate this stuff in real time, based on your goals, not just the rules.
You don’t have to guess which move is best.
You don’t have to write these responses alone. You don’t have to wait for months with no idea what’s happening.
You get a clear path. With smart software and real attorneys guiding the way.
Want to see how that feels?
Explore how PowerPatent helps founders win smarter →
Wrapping It Up
If you’ve gotten a Final Rejection, don’t panic.
You’re not at the end.
You’re at a fork in the road—and what you do next can make all the difference.
AFCP 2.0 gives you a quick, focused shot to get to allowance without extra cost.
RCE lets you regroup, refine, and re-engage with the examiner on your terms.
Appeal takes you higher—when you know you’re right, but the examiner won’t budge.
Leave a Reply