In the defence sector, patent strategy is not just about securing innovation; it’s about controlling information. This blog explores the rarely used but powerful option of filing a U.S. patent with a non-publication request. For defence innovators operating in NATO-aligned jurisdictions, withholding early disclosure through a non-publication request can help maintain confidentiality, reduce competitive risk, and support global collaboration through security agreements. Read on to understand when non-publication makes strategic sense—and when it could limit your options.
When it comes to defence innovations, timing and control over information can be just as critical as the technology itself. For companies developing sensitive or dual-use capabilities, even the act of filing a patent can introduce risk, exposing technical details before a product is ready for market or before security protocols are in place.
The desire/decision to withhold publication isn’t about secrecy for secrecy’s sake; it's about strategic control. Done right, it can protect your invention and your competitive edge.
In this context, a non-publication request can be a vital tool in your innovation toolbox. In the defence industry, intellectual property (IP) is more than a legal asset—it’s a means of national security.
When filing a patent application in the U.S., one critical decision is whether to allow pre-grant publication or to request non-publication. This choice can offer more than just privacy—it provides leverage, discretion, and time to manoeuvre in environments where early disclosure could undermine commercial or strategic objectives.
When filing a patent application, one critical decision is whether to allow pre-grant publication or to request non-publication. This option can offer leverage, discretion, and time to manoeuvre in environments where early disclosure could compromise commercial or strategic objectives..
By default, most patent offices publish applications 18 months after the earliest filing date, even before the patent is granted. At that point, the technical details become available to the public, including competitors. A non-publication request, if granted, allows applications to opt out of this early disclosure, keeping the application confidential until the patent is issued, usually 3-5 years after filing.
In the U.S., this is governed by 35 U.S.C. §122(b) and 37 CFR §1.213. To qualify, the following conditions need to be met:
Failing to meet these conditions, or later deciding to file internationally, requires withdrawing the request and notifying the USPTO within 45 days to avoid abandonment.
The non-publication option is not universally supported across all patent jurisdictions which means your ability to control disclosure timelines depends heavily on where you file. As a result, having a clear IP filings strategy becomes essential.
While often overlooked, non-publication can be a strategic differentiator—especially in sensitive industries like defence. For innovators operating on tight development timelines and under strict confidentiality obligations, the ability to keep an invention under wraps for years can provide meaningful business and security advantages.
Let’s take a closer look at what this option can offer.
While the benefits are real, non-publication is not without its trade-offs—and in some cases, those trade-offs can have a lasting impact on your patent strategy.
So, when does it actually make sense to go this route?
Here are a few scenarios where non-publication aligns with strategic priorities:
In each of these cases, the strategic value of controlling the disclosure timeline may outweigh the risks—as long as the decision is made intentionally and with the right safeguards in place. Always consult an IP specialist familiar with defence regulations and security laws before making this decision.
Non-publication isn’t the standard route…and it’s not right for every filing. But in the defence sector, where innovation often intersects with regulatory complexity, sensitive partnerships, or evolving market timing, it can offer a critical layer of control. Delaying disclosure gives innovators room to move, whether to meet internal milestones, address compliance requirements, or prepare for international collaboration, without prematurely exposing technical details.
If you’re considering whether a non-publication request fits your patent strategy, or need guidance navigating defence-specific IP constraints, Stratford Intellectual Property can help. We work with defence innovators, contractors, and scale-ups to align their IP approach with business goals, compliance requirements, and national security considerations.
Let’s talk about how your IP can serve as both a shield and a strategic asset.
| Natalie Giroux is President of Stratford Intellectual Property, where she leads a team of IP strategists and patent professionals dedicated to helping innovators protect and leverage their intellectual property. With deep expertise in strategic IP management and a business-first approach, Natalie has supported over 100 companies in aligning their IP portfolios with growth objectives. She is recognized globally as a leading IP strategist, including being named to the IAM Strategy 300 list. She is passionate about maximizing the value of innovation. |