The Palworld Pokémon lawsuit is a patent infringement case, not a copyright case over character designs. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company sued Pocketpair in the Tokyo District Court on September 18, 2024, targeting three Japanese patents covering gameplay mechanics: catching creatures by throwing an item, aiming and throwing capture items at field characters, and riding creatures with automatic transitions between mount types. The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction and 10 million yen (roughly $69,000) in damages, split evenly, plus late-payment interest. As of mid-2026 the case is still active, but Nintendo has narrowed its claims to older versions of the game and both the Japanese and U.S. patent offices have raised serious doubts about whether the underlying patents should have been granted.
The Patents at the Center of the Case
When Palworld launched in early access in January 2024, most of the online commentary focused on the resemblance between its “Pals” and Pokémon, and a copyright suit over character designs was widely expected. Nintendo went a different direction. The three patents it asserted are:
- JP 7545191, covering mechanics for catching creatures by throwing an item in a 3D environment.
- JP 7493117, covering aiming and throwing capture items at characters in the field.
- JP 7528390, covering a system for riding creatures, including automatic transitions between mount types based on terrain.
All three trace back to original applications filed in December 2021, during development of Pokémon Legends: Arceus, and were later carved out as divisional applications through accelerated examination at the Japan Patent Office. Each was registered shortly before the lawsuit was filed.
What Pocketpair Had to Change in Palworld
Rather than wait for a ruling, Pocketpair patched the contested mechanics out of the game. In a May 2025 blog post, the studio called the changes “compromises” made to “avoid disruptions to the development and distribution of Palworld,” while continuing to maintain that the patents are invalid and that the game does not infringe them.
Two changes have been shipped so far. In Patch v0.3.11 on November 30, 2024, Pal summoning was reworked: players had previously thrown Pal Spheres to summon a captured Pal to a chosen spot on the battlefield, and this was replaced with a static summon that teleports the Pal directly beside the player. Catching wild Pals by throwing spheres was not touched. Then in Patch v0.5.5 in May 2025, the gliding system was changed. Players could previously mount certain Pals and use them as gliders; now a physical glider item is required in the player’s inventory, and the affected Pals provide passive buffs to gliding rather than functioning as transportation.
Pocketpair described the changes as “disappointing” for both the team and the player base, saying “the alternative would have led to an even greater deterioration of the gameplay experience for players.” Communications director John Buckley told GamesRadar that the initial suit came as a “shock” because the studio had passed extensive legal reviews before release.
How the Case Has Narrowed
In November 2025, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company amended their complaint to limit its scope to older versions of Palworld. The amendment effectively acknowledges that Pocketpair’s patches have removed the contested mechanics from the current game. IP analyst Florian Mueller, who has tracked the case closely, said the amendment leaves “no pathway to victory” for Nintendo against current or future versions, including the coming 1.0 release.
The financial stakes have narrowed with the claims. Even if Nintendo prevails on what remains, damages are capped at sales of older versions during a limited window in Japan. Mueller estimated the maximum payout at roughly 5 million yen, about $30,000, which he called “chump change” and a “rounding error” against the cost of the litigation.
Are Nintendo’s Patents Going to Survive
While the Tokyo case continues, both the Japan Patent Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office have independently questioned whether Nintendo’s patents should have issued.
The Japan Patent Office Rejection
On October 17, 2025, a JPO examiner issued a non-final rejection of Nintendo patent application 2024-031879, a sibling of JP 7493117 and the parent of JP 7545191, two of the three patents asserted in the lawsuit. The examiner found the claimed mechanics lacked an “inventive step” under Japan’s Patent Act, citing prior art from ARK: Survival Evolved, Monster Hunter 4, Craftopia, Pokémon GO, and Kantai Collection. The rejection followed a third-party submission of prior art in April 2025 that analysts believe was coordinated with Pocketpair’s legal strategy.
The decision is non-final and does not bind the district court judge, Motoyuki Nakashima. Because the rejected application sits inside the same patent family as two of the three patents in suit, it signals validity problems at the core of Nintendo’s claims.
The USPTO Reexamination
Nintendo has built a parallel U.S. patent portfolio through the USPTO’s “Track One” prioritized examination program. On November 3, 2025, USPTO Director John Squires ordered an ex parte reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 12,403,397, which covers a system for summoning sub-characters and switching between manual and automatic battle modes. According to Law360, it was the first director-ordered reexamination in over 20 years.
Separately, the USPTO issued a non-final rejection of all 26 claims in another Nintendo application covering “summon sub-character and let it fight” mechanics, finding the claims obvious in light of prior art from patents previously granted to Nintendo itself, Konami, and Bandai Namco. Nintendo has two months to respond. In early 2026, Nintendo filed an updated information disclosure statement in the ‘397 reexamination, disclosing what one analyst called “unconventional prior art” including BradyGames strategy guides, forum posts, game wikis, and fan-made YouTube tutorials. The outcome is expected to influence how the USPTO treats non-traditional, digital-era prior art in gaming patents.
Pocketpair’s Defense
Pocketpair has run a two-track defense: patch the game to remove targeted mechanics, and challenge the patents’ validity. In court filings the company cited prior art from Rune Factory 5, Titanfall 2, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, Far Cry 5, Tomb Raider, Nexomon, Monster Hunter 4G, and Pocketpair’s own earlier game Craftopia, among others.
Mueller has flagged that the third asserted patent, JP 7528390 (the riding patent), was modified by Nintendo mid-litigation after the JPO granted a modification request in spring 2025. In his reading, a litigant only modifies a patent during an active infringement case if it fears the original claims will be found invalid, and he described the modified claim language as “extremely contorted.”
On infringement itself, one technical analysis noted that the riding patent describes a “one-step” mounting system with automatic terrain-based transitions between mount types, while Palworld uses a “two-step” process where the player sends out a creature and then mounts it separately.
What Happens Next
Palworld is scheduled to leave early access and launch as version 1.0 on July 10, 2026. The lawsuit’s next milestones are a technical briefing on October 1, 2026, followed by the Tokyo District Court’s preliminary disclosure of its views on November 9, 2026. Because Nintendo’s claims now apply only to older versions of the game, any injunction would have limited practical impact on Palworld going forward, and Pocketpair’s financial exposure, even in a loss, appears to sit around $30,000.
Nintendo has not yet sued in the United States. Mueller and other analysts have noted that the company is maintaining active U.S. patent applications that could be asserted against Pocketpair if the Japanese case does not achieve its aims. In that scenario, Pocketpair could challenge the patents under the Alice framework for software patent eligibility or through the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.