Imagine the gaming world holding its breath as Nintendo's high-stakes battle against Palworld hits yet another roadblock – this time from an unexpected corner of the legal system that could shake up everything we know about innovation in video games.
Just a short time after Japan's patent office turned down Nintendo's attempt to secure rights over some key Pokémon-inspired features like capturing monsters and tossing items, the United States has made an unusual move by deciding to take a fresh look at a patent Nintendo already had in the bag. This development raises serious doubts about whether that patent holds water, and it could deal a significant setback to Nintendo's aggressive lawsuit targeting the hit game Palworld (check out some beginner tips here: https://www.eurogamer.net/palworld-beginner-tips-tricks-9409).
Let's break this down step by step, especially for those new to the intricacies of patent law in gaming. Back in September, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) approved a fresh patent for Nintendo (Patent No. 12,403,397, which they applied for back in March 2023). This one focuses on core gameplay elements, like calling forth a secondary character – think of it as summoning a Pokémon or Pal – to fight enemies on a virtual battlefield. But now, as detailed in a report from Games Fray (https://gamesfray.com/huge-blow-for-nintendo-head-of-u-s-patent-office-takes-rare-step-to-order-reexamination-of-summon-subcharacter-and-let-it-fight-in-1-of-2-modes-patent/), the head of the USPTO, John A. Squires, has stepped in personally to order a re-evaluation of this patent. Why? Because they've uncovered what's known as 'prior art' – essentially, earlier inventions or ideas that already existed and might make Nintendo's claims invalid.
For beginners, prior art is like finding old blueprints that show someone else built a similar house before you did; it can undermine your right to claim it as your own invention. In his official order (you can read it here: https://gamesfray.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/25-11-03-Director-Initiated-Order-for-Ex-Parte-Reexamination-397-Patent.pdf), Squires explains that new evidence has sparked 'substantial new questions of patentability' for specific parts of the patent. These include things like moving your main character around a digital field based on player controls, bringing in a helper character to join the action, directing that helper to clash with an enemy right there on the spot, or even positioning the helper in an empty area where it moves and fights on its own – or sometimes the whole battle plays out without much player input, like an auto-battle mode in many RPGs.
But here's where it gets controversial: Squires points to two older patents as the smoking gun. One comes from Konami, filed way back in 2002, and the other is from Nintendo itself in 2019. Both deal with controlling main characters and their sidekicks manually or automatically during battles in virtual environments. As the order puts it, any reasonable patent examiner would see these as crucial pieces that could prove the new claims aren't original enough. And this is the part most people miss – re-examinations like this are super rare; Games Fray points out it's the first director-initiated one since 2012. It doesn't guarantee the patent will be tossed out, but experts say it's 'highly likely' to happen. Nintendo gets two months to fight back with their arguments, and outsiders, including possibly Palworld's creators, can jump in with their own evidence during that window.
This US twist comes hot on the heels of a similar snub from Japan. Last March, Nintendo tried to patent mechanics involving catching creatures and hurling objects at them – straight out of the Pokémon playbook – but the Japan Patent Office rejected it. Their reasoning? Those ideas were already out there in games from Japan and abroad before Nintendo filed. The rejection, which isn't set in stone yet, relied on info from an anonymous tipster (widely thought to be Pocketpair, the folks behind Palworld) highlighting parallels in titles like Monster Hunter 4, where you trap beasts; Ark: Survival Evolved (https://www.eurogamer.net/games/ark-survival-evolved), with its taming and combat systems; and even Pokémon Go (https://www.eurogamer.net/games/pokemon-go), which popularized throwing mechanics for captures on mobile devices. To expand a bit, these examples show how such features have evolved across genres, from action-adventure to survival games, making it tricky to claim ownership over something so foundational.
All of this drama stems from Nintendo's bold lawsuit filed last year against Pocketpair (https://www.eurogamer.net/nintendo-sues-palworld-developer-for-infringement-of-multiple-patents), right after Palworld exploded onto the scene and racked up 25 million players in its first month alone (https://www.eurogamer.net/palworld-reaches-25m-players-in-first-month). Nintendo claims Palworld rips off 'multiple' of their patents, blending creature collection with survival elements in a way that echoes Pokémon but adds guns and crafting for a fresh twist. Pocketpair isn't backing down, though – they've promised to battle it out in court (https://www.eurogamer.net/palworld-developer-vows-to-fight-nintendo-lawsuit-on-behalf-of-fans-and-indie-developers) to protect indie creators from big corporations stifling creativity. It's a classic David vs. Goliath story in gaming.
In this article
Palworld (https://www.eurogamer.net/games/palworld)
PS4, PS5, Xbox One, Xbox Series X/S, PC
Related topics
Now, let's stir the pot a little: Is Nintendo right to guard its ideas so fiercely, or is this lawsuit just a way for a giant like them to squash up-and-coming rivals and stifle innovation? What do you think – should patents in gaming cover broad mechanics like throwing to capture, or is that too vague and harmful to the industry? Drop your thoughts in the comments below; I'd love to hear if you're Team Nintendo, Team Pocketpair, or somewhere in between!
