The Japan Patent Office has issued a non-final rejection against a Nintendo patent application tied to the company’s ongoing legal battle with Palworld developer Pocketpair.
The rejection targets patent application JP 2024-031879, which reportedly covers gameplay mechanics including lock-on targeting systems and item gathering through deployed characters or devices. The JPO’s decision came after a third party submitted prior art information to the patent office, a common practice in Japan that allows anyone to provide evidence to examiners during the review process.
The cited prior art includes ARK: Survival Evolved, Monster Hunter 4, Pocketpair’s own earlier game Craftopia, browser game Kantai Collection, and Pokémon GO. All of these games were released before the patent application’s December 2021 priority date.
According to analysis of the office action, the JPO specifically referenced Monster Hunter 4‘s target lock-on system and the game’s Insect Glaive weapon mechanics, which allow players to gather items and buffs through a deployed insect companion. These features appear to challenge Nintendo’s claims around similar gameplay systems.
The patent application is part of a broader portfolio Nintendo is using in its legal action against Palworld. The company previously secured Japanese patents JP7505852 and JP7545191, which have been reported as the basis for infringement claims against Pocketpair’s breakout survival game.
Palworld launched in early access in January 2024 and quickly became one of the year’s biggest releases, selling millions of copies across PC and Xbox. The game combines creature collection with survival mechanics, base building, and automation systems. The Pokémon Company announced it was investigating the game shortly after launch, and Nintendo followed with patent infringement lawsuits in Japan.
When your own IP works against you
The inclusion of Pokémon GO as prior art adds an ironic twist to the situation. Despite being a Pokémon-branded title, the game was developed by Niantic and released in 2016. Its capture mechanics and gameplay interactions now serve as evidence against Nintendo’s patent claims.
This rejection is not final. Nintendo can respond to the JPO’s concerns by arguing why their claims are novel, amending the patent’s scope, or distinguishing their invention from the cited games. The examination process may continue through multiple rounds before reaching a final decision. Even if some claims are rejected, Nintendo could potentially secure narrower protections through amendments.
Third-party submissions are a standard part of Japanese patent prosecution. They don’t make the submitter a party to the case but can influence the examiner’s analysis. In this instance, the submission successfully brought several relevant games to the JPO’s attention, prompting the office action.
Nintendo has previously secured U.S. patents 12,409,387 and 12,403,397, which have been discussed in connection with the Palworld dispute. The company’s legal strategy appears to involve a portfolio of related patents across multiple jurisdictions.
