Japanese Attorney Says Nintendo Having 22 Out of 23 Patent Claims Rejected is Not a Big Deal

Suing Palworld might become more difficult but not impossible.

As Nintendo continues waging lawfare against Palworld developer Pocketpair, accusing the AA studio of infringing on patents filed only after Palworld's release, a recent development has stolen the headlines regarding 22 out of 23 claims from Nintendo's latest recent application being rejected by examiners, handing the gaming giant an apparent loss. In response, Japanese patent attorney Kiyoshi Kurihara has stepped in to defend Nintendo, explaining in a detailed write-up why only one claim surviving in the end is actually not a big deal and isn't as sensational as it might seem for the uninitiated.

Pocketpair

Shared on Yahoo Japan, Kurihara's objection clarifies that while the patent application US20240286040A1, which pertains to the concept of players riding characters, did have 22 out of 23 claims dismissed as unpatentable by the US Patent Office, this is unlikely to be a problem for Nintendo, as patent applications typically include multiple claims ranging from broad to narrow.

"This case is a common pattern in which 22 claims were rejected because they were too broad, leaving only one claim to survive," reads the attorney's report. "If the application is amended to focus on the one claim that was not rejected, it will be possible to continue the application or fight the rejected claim further in an appeal."

In most cases, Kurihara explains, broader claims are usually found to be unpatentable due to not being novel enough, while narrower ones still have the chance to get approval from the commission even if they are a part of the same application. In this case, the application as a whole can still be granted a patent if the broad claims are removed through amendments, securing the associated rights for Nintendo.

For those siding with Pocketpair in this David vs. Goliath-like legal battle and critical of Nintendo's usual tactics – seen by many as overly harsh and aggressive – there's a silver lining, as the lawyer's analysis concludes by saying that "it is possible that enforcing rights against Palworld has become more difficult because the scope of the claim was narrower than expected," and while this isn't a crushing defeat for Nintendo, it's far from a resounding victory the gaming giant probably hoped for.

So, what do you think about the Nintendo vs. Pocketpair case? Whose side are you on? Leave your thoughts down in the comments!

Don't forget to join our 80 Level Talent platform and our new Discord server, follow us on Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Telegram, TikTok, and Threads, where we share breakdowns, the latest news, awesome artworks, and more.

Your next big break, starts here.

Art by Abanob Atef

Join discussion

Comments 12

Anonymous user
Nintendo is disgusting for this they are literally waging war because pal world stepped into their genre that they didn't even make

That's like call of duty suing battlefield because they use guns to kill other players ..
3
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
lots of ignorant comments here, from both angles. which is to be expected from something that's about the law, especially when it's Japanese law and not American (which is what most folks worried about this are familiar with).

Nintendo did not go after Palworld because it's competition. it's going after Palworld because Pocket Pair established what is ostensibly a Pokémon Company-esque tryst with Sony—Nintendo's corporate nemesis. Nintendo is also the former employer for PP's CEO, and in Japanese corporate culture, it is a big faux pas to "backstab" the company that gave you your big break by working with their competition like that.

Creatures, Inc. 1) is not who primarily makes the games—that continues to be Game Freak. Creatures handles support stuff, and 2) is not "still an indie company [by Japanese standards]". by Japanese standards, they are a proxy for Nintendo. incredible to claim that a vassal company of Nintendo is comparable to an indie.

Game Freak, while they try to work on non-Nintendo stuff, is still about as close as you can get to a subsidiary without actually being one. Nintendo literally own the building they work in. GF is entirely dependent on Nintendo, and that is by design. that's the textbook definition of "not indie".
0
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
"Nintendo, more like Pretendo."

Here in 2025 where FlashGitz' old "Racist Mario" video feels relevant. Nintendo is not a good or nice company. They are extremely narcissistic, and would rather copyright a bad dragon d***o, a child's drawing, or steal from other IP (i.e. Mario was a re-skinned Popeye, DK is King Kong, etc), than ever admit that they don't own the whole world of creative thought.
1
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
You wanna sue the eternity of Rockstar for having horses in their games to Nintendo? Because that's is characters riding characters.
0
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
Nintendo is a very ignorant company who is anti-consumer they make good games they just have terrible people leading the company, they sued I believe an 11 (12? They were just a child either way) year old boy who made a ramshackle cardboard gizmo to entertain himself that was inspired by Nintendo. They sued a small grocery business for having the name "Super Mario" due to the owners name being Mario.
Most of their lawsuits are excessive with punishments and targeting begin with it doesn't change my opinion on them being essentially an over protective franchise that will attack anyone for anything. Palworld might have similar designs to their blasted pokemon but rest assured Nintendo isn't exactly innocent on their end with similar design and gameplay features as there has been a few games prior before their first ever game release with similar mechanics and gameplay, pokemon stolen or ripped off designs from dragon quest while also stealing their gameplay and game ideas from Atlus like their game Digital Devil. So screw Nintendo they don't even have a single original idea either as most of their ideas come from other developers and publishers.
They have also humiliated their partners in the past and never make trusting decisions that benefit partners they have been a very reclusive company that makes it harder each year to partners with results ending with ownership, integration, or full blown control. Even with companies having any sort of freedom to their selves from Nintendo have a hard time gaining contracts or partnering with more due to Nintendo's own contracts preventing them from doing so.
1
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
Never buying Nintendo stuff again, sincerely a Nintendo fanboy for the first 15 years of my life. Garbage company with great games.
0
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
You ppl disgust me you know that palworld took pokemons designs gor themselves and their so lazy they didn't even bother chasing the designs that much all of you are missing out in a good company palworlds company is so bad and so lazy they copy other people's games snd designs im glad palwolrd isn't around as much anymore hope it burns all the way down
-2
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
Even if Nintendo sues Pocketpair and gets Palworld revoked, not enough people care about Palworld. Nostalgic fans and parents are still going to spend top dollar on the Nintendo name. The best we can hope for is Palworld sticking around and hopefully Creatures Inc. (which by Japanese standards is still and indie company) is given more time and money to work on Pokemon since they'll actually have competition.
-6
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
Ya know I can see why Nintendo would do something. Like first picketpairs craftopia was basically adding crafting to breathe of the wild....even using the zelda font colouring and sounds for the region pop ups. Blatant theft.

Palworld not so much except recognition, we all know at laucnh it was dubbed pokemon with guns.. I mean you could tell it's legend or arceus with crafting and guns added. but it's evolved from a copy to its own game. And the kicker is they arent even seeing them for stealing that stuff which anyone with a brain could see was stolen. But for base mechanics. If they went after pocket pair for the stuff that made sense sure, but the witch hunt is just gross.
-3
Anonymous user
·a month ago·
Anonymous user
Exactly,.. I will never buy another Nintendo product ever again. Anything I already own by them I'm burning. This is the most trashiest thing a company could do, do they not see that their reputation is being tainted by this? Or do they just not care? Because last time I checked I'm pretty sure you need people to like your company to continue existing
2
Anonymous user
·a month ago·

A Week After "Basically Announcing" Minecraft 2, Notch Basically Cancels It

Instead, he and his team will focus on the previously-announced retro-style roguelike.

Rumor: Possible Release Date for Grand Theft Auto 6 Revealed

A video game store from Uruguay appears to have disclosed the launch date for the gaming industry's most anticipated title.

Breaking: Unity Suddenly Lays Off Numerous Developers With a 5 AM Email

Apparently, the entire Unity Behavior team was cut, alongside many other employees.

Metal Damage VDM Brush
by Nicolas Swijngedau
40 hand sculpted metal damage brushes all contained within one Multi-Alpha brush. Perfect to speed up your armors creation!
Error
(2000-0001)
Clearcut Series: SD Materials
by Emiel Sleegers
In this tutorial, you will be going over on how to create 4 very different materials from scratch in SD. The goal of these courses is to teach you a solid workflow that we also use in the AAA game industry.
Error
(2000-0001)