According to Eurogamer.net, the US Patent and Trademark Office has taken the “rare” step of re-examining Nintendo’s previously granted Pokémon patent (No. 12,403,397) that covers gameplay mechanics for summoning sub-characters to battle enemies. USPTO director John A. Squires personally ordered the re-examination after discovering prior art in two older patents – one filed by Konami in 2002 and another by Nintendo itself in 2019. This development comes just weeks after Japan rejected Nintendo’s March 2023 patent application for monster capture and throwing mechanics, citing similar mechanics already existing in games like Monster Hunter 4, Ark: Survival Evolved, and Pokémon Go. Nintendo now has two months to respond to the US re-examination order, which marks the first such director-initiated re-examination since 2012. The patent challenges represent significant setbacks for Nintendo’s controversial lawsuit against Palworld developer Pocketpair, launched last year following Palworld’s massive success.
Sponsored content — provided for informational and promotional purposes.
Why This Patent Fight Matters
Here’s the thing about patenting game mechanics – it’s incredibly tricky territory. Nintendo‘s trying to claim ownership over concepts like “summoning a character to fight automatically” and “throwing items to capture creatures.” But game design has been iterating on these ideas for decades. The USPTO director specifically cited Konami’s 2002 patent and Nintendo’s own 2019 filing as evidence that these mechanics weren’t exactly groundbreaking innovations. Basically, if you can find prior examples of similar mechanics in older games, your patent becomes much harder to defend. And that’s exactly what’s happening here.
Nintendo’s Legal Gambit
Nintendo’s lawsuit against Pocketpair always seemed like a high-stakes gamble. Palworld sold over 15 million copies in its first month and became a massive overnight success that clearly borrowed aesthetic and mechanical inspiration from Pokémon. But inspiration versus infringement is a legal minefield. Nintendo’s strategy appears to be using patents rather than copyright claims, which is interesting because copyright protection for game mechanics is notoriously weak. Patents give stronger protection – if you can get them and keep them. But now both the US and Japan are questioning whether Nintendo should have these patents at all.
What This Means for Game Devs
Pocketpair’s response to the lawsuit highlighted their concern about small studios being “hindered or discouraged from pursuing creative ideas.” And they’ve got a point. If established companies can patent broad gameplay mechanics, it could seriously limit innovation in the industry. The USPTO’s rare intervention suggests even patent officials recognize the danger of granting overly broad protection for game mechanics that have evolved through industry-wide iteration. This case could set important precedents about how far patent protection can extend in game development. Will we see more challenges to existing game patents if Nintendo loses here? Probably.
The Road Ahead
So where does this leave Nintendo’s lawsuit? In pretty rough shape, honestly. Without these key patents, their infringement case against Pocketpair gets much harder to prove. The fact that both US and Japanese patent offices are pushing back suggests Nintendo may have overreached with their patent claims. They’ve got two months to convince the USPTO why their patent should stand, but with prior art already identified from multiple sources, that’s going to be an uphill battle. This could ultimately force Nintendo to reconsider their legal strategy entirely. Sometimes the best move isn’t to fight every battle – especially when the patent office itself is questioning your weapons.
