On August 21, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in US Inventor v. Squires (Case No. 2024-2378), dismissed an inventor group's lawsuit seeking to compel the USPTO to amend the patent cover language. The plaintiffs argued that the "right to exclude" language has been misleading since the 2006 eBay Supreme Court decision. The court dismissed the case due to lack of standing.
This ruling might be misunderstood as a further restriction on U.S. patent enforcement. In reality, it merely maintains the status quo, confirming that administrative patent covers do not dictate judicial remedies. For Taiwanese companies not involved in U.S. litigation or those holding patents solely for defensive purposes, this decision has no impact. Whether an injunction is granted has depended on court-evaluated irreparable harm factors since 2006, not the cover text.
For legal directors planning U.S. patent litigation, two actions should be scheduled: first, when assessing patent value, prioritize evaluating whether "irreparable harm" can be proven; second, when budgeting for litigation, incorporate a contingency plan for scenarios where only monetary damages are awarded, rather than assuming an injunction will be granted automatically.