The United States Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari on Google’s petition that challenged the Patent and Trademark Office’s “settled expectations” policy, thereby leaving the lower-court’s judgment intact.
Policy and the Patent Challenge
The “settled expectations” policy is used when deciding whether to institute inter partes review proceedings, which allow companies accused of patent infringement to challenge the validity of patents before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Under the approach, the age of a patent can weigh against granting a review where the patent owner has developed settled expectations surrounding its patent rights.
Under this framework, the USPTO has routinely refused to entertain reviews of patents that are older than six years, even though the six-year threshold is not mandated by statute. Google argued that the agency had effectively created an artificial time limit for patent challenges that Congress never authorised.
The dispute began when the company sought to invalidate a patent owned by software firm VirtaMove, which claims the search giant infringed a server-software assertion. The agency rejected the request for review in 2025 after applying the settled expectations rule.
The Federal Circuit subsequently ruled against the tech giant, prompting it to ask the Supreme Court to intervene. The petition asserted that the USPTO exceeded its statutory authority by using patent age as a basis for denial.
Implications for Tech Companies
Inter partes review, a mechanism created by the America Invents Act, enables parties to ask the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to re-evaluate the validity of granted claims. Large technology firms routinely rely on this process, with Samsung, Apple and Alphabet ranking among the most active petitioners from 2020 to 2025.
Data from intellectual-property researcher Patexia shows a decline in accepted petitions: 37 % in 2026 under USPTO Director John Squires, down from 65 % under predecessor Kathi Vidal. The patent office outlined several factors last year that can favour denying an inter partes review petition, including the settled expectations of patent owners.
For companies that frequently defend against infringement suits, the ongoing legal battles over USPTO discretion could shape how readily they can pursue administrative challenges instead of turning to federal courts. For companies regularly defending patent infringement lawsuits, the continuing disputes could affect how readily they can use administrative proceedings to challenge patents outside the federal court system.
Wider Litigation Continues
Separate lawsuits involve the search company, Apple and Intel, contesting another USPTO rule that governs when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may decline reviews. The Federal Circuit rejected that challenge in February, and the same companies have asked the Supreme Court to examine the matter.
