Nintendo's patent fight against Palworld over Pokemon mechanics "further" undermined, IP expert says, as US Patent and Trademark lead calls controversial summoning patent into question

Pikachu fainted, looking worn out on the ground in the Pokemon anime.
(Image credit: The Pokemon Company)

Nintendo and The Pokemon Company's controversial summoning patent is under scrutiny by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, as its director has ordered a rare re-examination of its validity in a move one IP expert believes "further undermines the credibility" of the companies' legal battle against Palworld.

The patent in question – patent number 12,403,397 – came into the spotlight back in September, as it appeared to describe the idea of summoning a character to fight in battle. More specifically, it refers to "sub characters," and in basic terms describes a system that allows said sub characters to fight either manually or automatically, a bit like in Pokemon Scarlet and Violet (which lets you send your Pokemon out onto the field to attack wild foes independently, and in a different way to you initiating a turn-based fight).

Blastoise seen in the Pokemon Origins anime series.

(Image credit: The Pokemon Company)

Squire continues: "The Examiner's Reasons for Allowance, mailed July 8, 2025, cites the failure of the prior art of record to teach that 'a player can be allowed to perform two types of battles, that is, a battle by the first mode in which the player performs an operation input and a battle by the simpler second mode,' in support of the issuance of the '397 patent.

"As explained above, each of Yabe and Taura," that is, the Konami and older Nintendo patent, "teaches a player being allowed to perform a battle in a manual mode and in a simpler, automatic mode. Thus, a reasonable examiner would consider each of Yabe and Taura to be important in deciding whether the claims are patentable, and Yabe and Taura each raises a substantial new question of patentability."

So, what happens next? Squires states that the specific claims from the patent that are now questionable are 1, 13, 25, and 26, which are independent claims. Mueller speculates that if these fall apart, the rest of the patent will, too. "This is a house of cards," he writes.

The order doesn't immediately mean that the patent is being revoked, although as Mueller writes, it could lead to that. More broadly, Mueller believes the entire situation undermines Nintendo's credibility in its lawsuit against Pocketpair.

"This development further undermines the credibility of Nintendo's patent assertions against Palworld," Mueller writes. "This is now the second case in as many weeks where a patent or patent application related to the patents Nintendo is asserting against Palworld is viewed skeptically by one of the world's top four patent offices."

Nintendo and The Pokemon Company's legal battle against Pocketpair is still ongoing. As for this ordered reexamination of patent 12,403,397, Nintendo has two months to respond.

"Nintendo is so wrong, it hurts" – US IP expert says Nintendo claiming mods don't invalidate its Pokemon patents is "just a loser argument" and a "Hail Mary" in its ongoing legal fight with Palworld.

Catherine Lewis
Deputy News Editor

I'm GamesRadar+'s Deputy News Editor, working alongside the rest of the news team to deliver cool gaming stories that we love. After spending more hours than I can count filling The University of Sheffield's student newspaper with Pokemon and indie game content, and picking up a degree in Journalism Studies, I started my career at GAMINGbible where I worked as a journalist for over a year and a half. I then became TechRadar Gaming's news writer, where I sourced stories and wrote about all sorts of intriguing topics. In my spare time, you're sure to find me on my Nintendo Switch or PS5 playing through story-driven RPGs like Xenoblade Chronicles and Persona 5 Royal, nuzlocking old Pokemon games, or going for a Victory Royale in Fortnite.

You must confirm your public display name before commenting

Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.