Recently, John Squires, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), issued an order to put an end to the inter partes review proceedings that Yangtze Memory Technologies had initiated against two patents (US8,945,996 B2 and US10,872,903 B2) owned by Micron Technology. In English legal and patent - related contexts, "inter partes review" is a specific administrative process where a third - party (in this case, Yangtze Memory Technologies) can challenge the validity of a patent before the USPTO.

On January 16, 2026, Director Squires overturned the previous decision made by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The board had initially agreed to accept Yangtze Memory Technologies' inter partes review petitions. The order made it clear that this decision was not primarily based on the fact that Yangtze Memory Technologies had been included on the U.S. Department of Commerce's 'Entity List'. In the context of U.S. - China trade and technology relations, the 'Entity List' is a list of foreign entities that are subject to specific license requirements for the export, re - export, or transfer (in - country) of certain items due to national security or foreign policy concerns.

Instead, the decision was due to Yangtze Memory Technologies' inadequate explanation of its 'exact identity'. Squires pointed out that in its response, Yangtze Memory Technologies failed to answer the crucial question of whether it was owned or controlled by a Chinese state - owned enterprise. This question is significant in the current geopolitical and business environment, as state - owned enterprises often have different operational and strategic considerations compared to private companies.

Although the order did not directly make a ruling on whether a foreign government has the right to initiate inter partes reviews, Squires hinted in a footnote that the USPTO has the discretion to reject petitions if the petitioner is a sovereign entity. This reflects the USPTO's stance on maintaining the integrity and proper functioning of the patent review process.

As of now, neither party has issued a response to media requests for comments.