Alphabet has petitioned the US Supreme Court to review an internal "settled expectations" rule at the US Patent and Trademark Office. This rule permits patent office officials to reject patent validity challenges initiated by Alphabet on the grounds that the patents have been in effect for many years. This legal action represents the third and most crucial step in Alphabet's challenge against this rule, and its outcome could potentially reshape the landscape of US patent invalidation review procedures.
The core dispute in this case stems from the discretionary dismissal principle of "settled expectations" introduced by the US Patent and Trademark Office in 2025. According to this principle, even if a patent challenger presents substantial grounds for invalidity, the patent office can still refuse to initiate an inter partes review process based on the rationale that "the patent has been in effect for many years, creating settled expectations."
Alphabet had previously mounted two legal challenges against this rule: first, by requesting reconsideration from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and subsequently, by applying for a writ of mandamus from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, both of which were denied. In its January 2026 ruling, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals stated that the decision to initiate an inter partes review falls within the discretionary authority of the Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office and that such a decision is final and not subject to appeal.
In its appeal, Alphabet argues that the US Patent and Trademark Office introduced the "settled expectations" principle without undergoing the notice-and-comment rulemaking process required by the Administrative Procedure Act, constituting a procedural violation. Additionally, Alphabet contends that the retroactive application of the rule infringes upon its due process rights. This is because, prior to the rule's enactment, Alphabet, relying on previous agency guidance, made the decision to forgo raising patent invalidity claims in district court, and the new rule has now deprived it of the opportunity to challenge the relevant patents at the patent office.
This case has garnered significant attention within the technology industry. Other technology companies, such as Apple and Samsung, which also face numerous patent infringement lawsuits, have submitted amicus curiae briefs supporting Alphabet's appeal. These companies argue that the current restrictions on inter partes review proceedings at the patent office are undermining the effectiveness of this post-grant review mechanism, forcing more patent validity disputes into costly federal court litigation.
The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear the case. If the Supreme Court agrees to review it, oral arguments are expected to be scheduled for this autumn, with a ruling anticipated in 2027.
Comments