USPTO Introduces New Criteria Impacting Patent Challenges

On March 11, 2026, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced new criteria affecting how Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post-Grant Review (PGR) petitions will be evaluated. The memorandum, issued by USPTO Director Squires, establishes guidelines that emphasize the connection of patented technology to the United States and the size of petitioners involved in infringement cases.

Two of the newly introduced criteria specifically focus on whether the technology in question is tied to U.S. manufacturing. The third criterion assesses the size of the petitioner who has been accused of patent infringement. These factors will play a critical role in determining whether petitions for IPR or PGR will be granted, taking into account the integrity of the U.S. patent system, the efficient administration of the USPTO, and the agency’s ability to manage these reviews in a timely manner.

In his explanation of the new criteria, Director Squires highlighted concerning trends in the U.S. manufacturing sector. Recent statistics indicate that a significant portion of the manufacturing base, particularly within the electronics and computer industries, has shifted overseas. Furthermore, a USPTO study revealed that many of the frequent petitioners for IPR and PGR do not maintain a substantial manufacturing presence in the United States and have no plans to establish one.

These new guidelines suggest that the USPTO will take a more critical stance when considering whether to deny IPR or PGR petitions. Specifically, the Director will closely examine whether a petitioner is involved in manufacturing the alleged infringing products within the United States and whether the technology associated with a patent reflects investment in U.S. manufacturing capabilities.

The size of the petitioner is expected to influence the decision-making process as well. Larger multinational corporations may face greater scrutiny if they do not have manufacturing operations in the U.S., while smaller businesses that demonstrate substantial U.S. manufacturing or investment in domestic production may gain an advantage. This shift could favor patent owners who produce or license competing products domestically, while potentially disadvantaging those who do not.

Director Squires’ memorandum reflects a creative approach to discretionary denials, encouraging both patent owners and petitioners to rethink their strategies when advocating for or opposing such decisions. The emphasis on U.S. manufacturing ties marks a significant change in how the USPTO evaluates the merits of patent challenges, potentially reshaping the landscape of patent litigation in the United States.

As the implications of these new criteria unfold, stakeholders in the patent system will need to adapt to the evolving environment. The focus on domestic manufacturing could lead to more robust protections for U.S.-based innovators while posing challenges for those who operate primarily outside the country.