Nintendo's crusade against Palworld just got a reality check from the US Government as "summon and fight" patent rejected

With the help of our friends over at GamesFray, we've been following Nintendo's aggressive legal posturing against Palworld creator Pocketpair in both the patent infringement challenge in Japan that's currently ongoing, and what looked to be Nintendo building a patent army in the US in preparation for filing a legal challenge closer to home.

In Nintendo's attempt to 'catch-em-all' and collect a bunch of legal filings specifically designed to trap the Palworld creators in litigation, they got a controversial "summon and fight" patent through the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Essentially, trying to claim ownership over the mechanics of aiming an item, catching a monster, and then summoning it to fight in different modes.

Well... back in November, we reported that the patent in question had been pulled for closer scrutiny by the USPTO, and, officially, Nintendo has now been issued a stinging non-final rejection of the patent. Not just a few parts of it, all 26 of the patent's claims have been rejected. Ouch.

Using Nintendo's own history against them

For a patent to actually hold up under scrutiny, it needs to be a genuine leap forward or completely original, not just a remake of things everyone is already doing. You can't just take a standard gameplay mechanic, tweak one UI element, and say the idea now belongs to you.

It’s like when I was a teenager and spent hours sticking gaudy diamantes all over my pink Motorola Razr. It looked different, sure, but I wasn’t exactly calling up the patent office to claim I’d invented a new mobile phone (also I'm pretty sure I stole the idea from Smash Hits magazine).

In this case, the USPTO examiner hasn't even looked at a single video game to prove Nintendo was overreaching. Instead, they've looked at Nintendo's own history. The examiner in this case has dismantled the patent entirely, combining several pieces of paperwork to show that Nintendo wasn't inventing anything new. Again, they have looked to "prior art" in previous filings to prove that Nintendo's so-called invention in this patent was actually just a rehash of what's come before.

The four filings used to discredit Nintendo's claims were:

• Taura - One of Nintendo's own 2019 patents. This patent already covered the core basics of summoning a "sub-character" to fight alongside a player. By using this, the USPTO argued that Nintendo was trying to patent the same idea twice just to make it a more effective weapon.
• Yabe - Dating back to the PS2 era, this Konami patent described characters having two distinct battle modes. One where they act on their own (Auto) and one where the player gives direct orders (Manual).
• Motokura - Another Nintendo filing from 2020. This one dealt with how characters are positioned and moved within a 3D space during gameplay transitions. It was used to prove that the technical way Palworld handles spawning monsters wasn't a new invention either.
• Shimomoto - This 2019 filing from Bandai Namco provided the missing link. it described the specific logic of how a game determines where a summoned character should appear in relation to the player.

In referencing a combination of these patents as a counterargument against the one Nintendo has been trying to secure, the USPTO has essentially told Nintendo they are just describing game mechanics that Konami, Bandai Namco, and even Nintendo themselves have already had on the books for many years prior.

The patent office didn't look at any video games?

One of the most fascincating details from the report is that the examiner reached this conclusions without needing to play Palworld or Pokemon. They've simply said the concept of the summon and fight mechanic itself is unoriginal. This prevents Nintendo from arguing that their specific implementation of the mechanic or how it feels in their game makes it unique from anyone else who uses it.

If the logic was already in a Konami filing from the PS2 era, Nintendo doesn't get to now claim ownership of that in 2026.

So what happens next?

It's important to note the term "non-final". Nintendo still has a 2-month window to respond, and this period can be extended if Nintendo requests it. Even when the decision is final, it can be appealed, so it really is a case of seeing whether Nintendo will take this lying down. They can still tweak the language of the patent to be more specific. However, the total rejection of all 26 claims here is significant. It's much harder for Nintendo to amend when, normally, at least a few of them would survive.

There's no new news on the Nintendo vs. Pocketpair case taking place in Japan right now, and since that drama kicked off, even more games that bear similarities to Pokémon have been launched or announced (Aniimo, for example).

On the whole, for Palworld fans and indie developers everywhere, this is a massive win. It signals that the big guys can't just claim basic game design concepts and sue anyone who dares use them. Nintendo might be determined, but the USPTO at least isn't interested in helping them preserve a monopoly on throwing stuff to catch monsters and use them in battle.

What do you think? Is Nintendo being reasonably protective of its legacy, or is this just a massive case of salt over other innovations like Palworld? Let us know in the comments!

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.