The US Supreme Court has declined to hear Google's challenge to a policy that makes it harder to review the validity of older patents. The decision leaves in place a US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) rule that can limit Google's ability to challenge patents involved in infringement disputes.
The case centers on a policy known as ‘settled expectations,' which gives greater weight to a patent's age when deciding whether to review it. Google argued that the policy goes beyond the patent office's legal authority and could make it easier for patent holders to defend older patents against challenges.
Google Disputed the Patent Office's Authority
The dispute began after software company VirtaMove accused Google of infringing one of its server-software patents. Google sought review through the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which reviews requests to determine whether existing patents should remain valid.
The patent office rejected Google's request in 2025, applying the settled expectations policy because the patent had been in force for more than six years. Google challenged that decision, but the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled against the company before the case reached the Supreme Court.
Google argued that Congress had not established a time limit for such challenges and that the patent office could not create one through its own policy. The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court not to take up the appeal.
Also Read: Lawyer Uses AI to Prepare Lawsuit Against Meta and Google, Helps Secure Rs. 50-Crore Jury Verdict
Patent Reviews Become Harder to Secure
The ruling comes as the USPTO has become more selective about which patent disputes it agrees to review. According to Reuters, the board accepted only 37% of petitions in 2026, down from 65% under the previous leadership.
Technology companies often use inter partes review, or IPR, to challenge patents they are accused of infringing. The process can offer an alternative to fighting patent disputes entirely through court litigation.
Google, Apple and Intel have also challenged a separate but related USPTO policy. After losing that case at the Federal Circuit in February, Google and Intel also asked the Supreme Court to review the decision.
The latest decision does not determine whether VirtaMove's patent was infringed or is valid. Instead, it leaves the patent office's review policy in place, potentially making it more difficult for companies to challenge older patents through the administrative process.