USPTO Director Squires Advances 'America First' Patent Policies Amid Shifting Review Trends

In March 2026, John Squires, who became the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director in September 2025, articulated a clear commitment to an "America First IP" agenda during testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet. He emphasized the USPTO's responsibility to uphold the unique legacy of American innovation with urgency.

Since President Trump's administration, the USPTO has seen a continuation of key patent policy trends under Director Squires. Notably, discretionary denials of patent challenges have increased, while the number of Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions filed has declined. Institution rates for these proceedings have reached record lows, reflecting a more stringent approach to patent validity challenges.

In response to these shifts, ex parte reexamination—a less commonly utilized USPTO proceeding—has experienced a resurgence, indicating a strategic pivot in how parties contest patent validity.

On March 11, 2026, Director Squires issued updated guidance expanding the factors considered in discretionary denials. The new criteria focus on assessing the U.S. ties of involved parties, including: (1) the extent to which accused products in parallel infringement proceedings are manufactured in the United States or linked to American manufacturing investments; (2) whether products made, sold, or licensed by the patent owner that compete with accused products are U.S.-manufactured; and (3) if the petitioner is a small business previously sued for infringement of the patent in question.

Further reinforcing this approach, on May 14, 2026, Director Squires designated a discretionary denial decision as precedential in Magnolia Medical Techs., Inc. v. Kurin, Inc., IPR2026-00097. In this decision, he elaborated on the legislative intent behind America Invents Act (AIA) review proceedings—such as IPRs and Post-Grant Reviews (PGRs)—as alternatives to district court litigation for resolving patent validity disputes. He noted that over time, these proceedings have often been misused for leverage or harassment rather than their intended purpose.

The decision also highlighted concerns about the concentration of petitions among a few large companies, many linked to foreign governments, and underscored the importance of public interest considerations in AIA proceedings. The ruling addressed issues including examiner error, inconsistent claim constructions across forums, involvement of foreign sovereigns, and settled expectations.

On the prosecution front, the USPTO’s Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot Program (ASAP!) has contributed to reducing the patent application backlog and increasing examination throughput. For the first time in nearly a decade, the office has issued more first office actions than new filings. Under ASAP!, applicants receive an Automated Search Results Notice identifying key prior art before the first office action, allowing them to submit preliminary amendments. The pilot, extended through June 1, 2026, may pave the way for broader AI integration in patent examination and related litigation processes.

In district court litigation, the patent landscape is poised for change with the announced retirement of Judge Alan Albright in August 2026. Known for his patent expertise and innovative procedures in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, his departure may influence venue strategies for patent disputes.

Given these developments, parties engaged in U.S. patent litigation and prosecution should carefully evaluate venue considerations, especially in Texas, and weigh the diminishing likelihood of institution at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) against alternative proceedings such as ex parte reexamination.

These policy shifts under Director Squires reflect a broader USPTO strategy to prioritize American manufacturing interests, streamline examination through AI, and recalibrate patent dispute resolution mechanisms to better serve the public and U.S. innovation ecosystem.