Patent Trends in 2025: The Omega Patents Unicorn Case and What It Means for Inventors

The Omega Patents case illustrates how leadership changes can have real-world impacts on patent protection.

---

As we move through 2025, the patent landscape continues to evolve with significant developments in both statistics and policy. Recent changes in USPTO leadership are creating waves that could reshape how patents are evaluated, challenged, and protected. Most notably, a remarkable case involving Omega Patents demonstrates how the tides may be turning for inventors who have faced repeated challenges to their intellectual property.

Recent Patent Grant Trends Show Renewed Growth

After a four-year decline, U.S. patent grants have shown a promising upward trajectory, rising 3.8% from calendar year 2023 to 324,043 in 2024^[1]. This resurgence signals strengthening innovation despite the economic challenges of recent years. Patent applications have also reached an all-time high, increasing 3% from 418,111 in 2023 to 430,625 in 2024^[1], indicating a robust pipeline of innovation.

Samsung Electronics maintained its position as the leading recipient of U.S. patents for the third consecutive year, while TSMC moved into second place ahead of Qualcomm^[2]. Apple secured the fourth position with 3,082 granted patents, showing impressive 21.53% growth from the previous year and moving up three spots in the rankings^[2].

Technology Fields Driving Innovation

The technological landscape of patents reveals where innovation capital is flowing. For the third year running, semiconductor technology dominated the patent space with 67,118 grants in 2024, showing remarkable growth from 49,831 in 2021^[3]. This trend reflects the critical importance of semiconductor technology in our increasingly digital economy.

Other prominent technology fields include:

• Artificial Intelligence: 54,022 patents in 2024, up significantly from 34,544 in 2020^[3]
• Medical-related patents: 53,648 in 2024, representing a dramatic 76.3% increase from 30,429 in 2023^[3]
• 5G technology and Virtual Reality also remain strong areas of innovation^[3]

New Leadership, New Direction

The appointment of Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce in February 2025 marks a significant shift in the U.S. patent landscape. Lutnick is the first Commerce Secretary to be a patented inventor himself, holding approximately 400 patents^[4][5]. During his confirmation hearing, he labeled the USPTO’s patent application backlog as “unacceptable” and pledged to address it^[6].

“My pursuit will be rigorous reduction of that to get it down,” Lutnick said of the PTO’s response timeline during his confirmation hearing^[6].

Equally significant is the appointment of Coke Morgan Stewart as Acting USPTO Director in January 2025^[7]. Stewart has a reputation as a strong believer in the U.S. patent system and patent rights^[4]. Her actions thus far suggest she will be an ally to innovators, especially startups and R&D-focused companies that rely heavily on patent protection.

The Unicorn Case: Omega Patents’ Remarkable Journey

While patent statistics and leadership changes provide context, a specific case has captured the attention of the patent community for its potential to reshape how patents are protected from repeated challenges. This “unicorn” case involves U.S. Patent No. 8,032,278 owned by Omega Patents^[4].

A Patent Tested Like No Other

The ‘278 patent has undergone extraordinary scrutiny:

• Five successful ex parte reexaminations
• Successful litigation with secondary considerations found
• Successful PTAB appeals in the second and fifth reexaminations based on secondary considerations^[4]

Despite this extensive history validating the patent’s claims, two companies-Geotab and Verizon Connect-filed Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenges against the patent^[4][8].

In both IPR proceedings (IPR2023-00504 and IPR2023-01162), the PTAB found the challenged claims unpatentable based on obviousness combinations^[4]. These decisions appeared inconsistent with the patent’s extensive history of surviving validity challenges.

The Game-Changing Intervention

What makes this case truly remarkable is what happened next. On May 2, 2025, Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart issued a Show Cause Order in the Verizon IPR case^[8], questioning the PTAB’s decision and citing several critical deficiencies in their analysis:

1. Inadequate evaluation of nexus: The Board failed to adequately explain its decision to deny Omega Patents a presumption of nexus between the claimed invention and commercial products^[4]
2. Insufficient consideration of licensing evidence: The Board disregarded evidence that the challenged patent “was the last patent standing and continued to collect royalties-even when others in the portfolio licenses expired”^[4]
3. Disregard for extensive prior adjudication: The order highlighted that the Office had already considered the patentability of the claims during five ex parte reexaminations, and a district court previously found the patent valid (a decision affirmed by the Federal Circuit)^[4]

Rather than simply remanding to the Board, Stewart’s order suggested that terminating the proceeding entirely might be more appropriate “given these circumstances encompassing seven prior challenges to the claims”^[4].

In response, Omega Patents filed a brief on May 12, 2025, arguing that the PTAB panels’ decisions undermined “the goals of consistency and finality in patent adjudication” and urging the Director to exercise discretion to terminate the IPR^[4].

As of May 14, 2025, the Federal Circuit granted a motion to stay the Geotab appeal, directing the parties to inform the court how they believe the appeal should proceed following the USPTO’s final resolution of the Verizon IPR case^[4].

Why This Case Matters for All Patent Holders

The Omega Patents case represents a potential turning point in how the USPTO handles patents that have survived multiple challenges. It raises fundamental questions about:

1. Serial Challenges: How many times should a patent be forced to defend itself against similar arguments?
2. Consistency: Should the USPTO maintain consistency in its decisions across different proceedings for the same patent?
3. Finality: When should patent holders be entitled to rely on the finality of favorable decisions?

Stewart’s Show Cause Order signals that the USPTO may be reconsidering its approach to these questions, potentially offering greater protection to patent holders who have repeatedly defended their patents successfully.

Looking Forward: A More Balanced Patent System?

The combination of rising patent grants, new leadership with direct inventor experience, and the potential precedent from the Omega Patents case suggests we may be entering a period of recalibration in the U.S. patent system.

For inventors and patent holders, this could mean:

• Greater certainty about the validity of successfully defended patents
• Protection from repeated, duplicative challenges
• More weight given to secondary considerations of non-obviousness
• Faster processing of patent applications as the backlog is addressed

For challengers, it means:

• More careful consideration before filing IPRs against patents with extensive prior validation
• Greater need to present truly novel arguments rather than recycling previously considered art
• Potentially higher bars for institution of reviews against previously validated patents

Conclusion

The patent landscape in 2025 shows promising signs of balanced growth and potential policy shifts that could strengthen the position of inventors and patent holders. The Omega Patents case illustrates how leadership changes can have real-world impacts on patent protection.

As Howard Lutnick stated at the National Inventors Hall of Fame induction ceremony, inventors now have “a friend, a supporter, and an admirer” at the Commerce Department^[4]. With Coke Stewart’s actions at the USPTO, this supportive approach appears to be taking concrete form.

For the innovation economy as a whole, a balanced patent system that provides both appropriate scrutiny of patent applications and reasonable finality for validated patents will ultimately support the constitutional purpose of the patent system: promoting progress in science and useful arts.

Note: This blog post reflects information available as of May 15, 2025, and future developments may impact the outcome of the cases discussed.

Sources:

1. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/patentlyo_howard-lutnick-and-the-patent-system-activity-7267195029025112066-RCUF  
2. https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/12/patent-grants-2024.html  
3. https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/11/uspto-patent-grant.html    
4. 2025cl3.pptx             
5. https://patentlyo.com/patent/2025/02/leadership-confirmed-secretary.html 
6. https://www.anaqua.com/resource/anaqua-analysis-of-uspto-patenting-statistics-2024/  
7. https://patentpc.com/blog/howard-lutnick-as-commerce-secretary-what-it-means-for-u-s-patents-and-innovation 
8. https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/coke-morgan-stewart