Full Breakdown
Nintendo and The Pokémon Company Face Patent Rejection Amid Palworld Lawsuit
7/23/2026, 11:41:59 AM
Core Event
Japan’s Patent Office (JPO) issued a notice rejecting Nintendo and The Pokémon Company’s divisional patent application (No. 2026-019762) for an “in-game monster-capturing system.” The examiner said the claimed mechanics lack an inventive step, citing prior-art such as Pokémon GO, the indie fangame Pokémon Generations (2013 YouTube video), ARK, Monster Hunter 4, Craftopia, and Kantai Collection. The rejection concerns a filing in the same patent family as two granted patents (JP7505852 and JP7545191) currently asserted against Pocketpair, the developer of Palworld, in the Tokyo District Court.
Background & Context
Nintendo and The Pokémon Company sued Pocketpair after Palworld’s release, targeting patents that cover specific gameplay functions—capturing creatures with a thrown object and transitioning between riding creatures or items. The newly rejected divisional application was a continuation of that strategy, aiming to broaden protection to mechanics such as touch-screen capture, a feature prominent in Pokémon GO.
Data & Statistics
- Prior-art games cited: ARK, Monster Hunter 4, Craftopia, Kantai Collection, Pokémon GO.
- Evidence: 2013 YouTube video of Pokémon Generations used to illustrate lack of novelty.
- The decision does not affect the two granted patents (JP7505852, JP7545191) that remain enforceable.
- Nintendo has a three-month window to file a petition for trial with the JPO Commissioner.
Official Statements & Responses
Nintendo’s legal team objected to the examiner’s reliance on the Pokémon Generations video, arguing it represented an infringing product and that precise naming of characters was irrelevant. The examiner dismissed these points, stating that copyright considerations do not affect the inventive-step analysis.
On-the-Ground Reports
Japanese internet users have shared excerpts of the examiner’s notice, noting its blunt tone and posting quotes for amusement. The reaction highlights the rarity of a patent office openly critiquing a major game developer’s claims.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Two patent numbers appear in coverage: the divisional application cited as No. 2026-019762 by automaton-media, and a different filing identified as 2024-031879 by gameluster. Both describe the same rejection based on lack of inventive step, but the discrepancy has not been clarified by the JPO. Details of Nintendo’s planned appeal arguments remain unspecified.
What’s Next
Nintendo may file a petition for trial, amend the application, or accept the rejection. The outcome will affect the two granted patents used in the Tokyo District Court case and may influence how gameplay-mechanic patents are evaluated in Japan.
