Robert Bahr Image

Robert Bahr

Partner, Former Deputy Commissioner for Patents

Maier & Maier PLLC

Robert Bahr is a Partner at Maier & Maier PLLC, where he specializes in all areas of patent practice. His expertise includes post-issuance proceedings at the United States Patent Office (USPTO), advising attorneys and our clients on complex patent prosecution matters, patent litigation strategy, and USPTO patent policy, practice and procedure. Mr. Bahr is an authority on patent laws, rules, and examining practice and procedure, for which he is highly sought after for expert testimony.

Mr. Bahr previously served as the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy at the USPTO. During his distinguished career at the USPTO, Mr. Bahr was involved in nearly all patent-related rule-making since 1995. His involvement in patent rule-making includes the changes to implement the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 and the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Mr. Bahr has provided administrative oversight and direction for the activities of the Office of Petitions, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of Patent Quality Assurance, Central Reexamination Unit, and Manual of Patent Examining Procedure staff during his tenure at the USPTO.

In 1984, Mr. Bahr began his distinguished career at the USPTO as a Patent Examiner, and became a legal advisor in the Office of Patent Legal Administration in 1994. In 2000, Mr. Bahr was appointed as an Administrative Patent Judge before elevating to the Senior Patent Counsel to the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy. Mr. Bahr then served as the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy beginning March of 2016.

Mr. Bahr has a Bachelor of Science degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Maryland, and a Juris Doctor from George Washington University.  He has been awarded two Department of Commerce Gold Medals and two Department of Commerce Bronze Medals.

Recent Articles by Robert Bahr

A Perspective on USPTO Rulemaking Following In re Chestek

There are many views on the significance of In re Chestek, No. 2022-1843 (February 14, 2024) to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) rulemaking process. One question I have asked myself is what I would do differently after Chestek if I were still involved in rulemaking at the USPTO. The simple answer is almost nothing: I would cite Chestek instead of the other decisions in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) section of a proposed or final rule.

Upcoming Events with Robert Bahr

Patent Masters™ 2026

June 8-10, 2026