IP / Regulatory Law Watch USPTO Expands Design Patent Protection for Digital and Immersive Interfaces On March 12th, 2026, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published supplemental examination guidance in the Federal Register, significantly expanding design patent protections for computer-generated interfaces, graphical user interfaces (GUIs), icons, and emerging immersive technologies, including virtual reality, augmented reality, projections, and holograms. The guidance, issued under Docket No. PTO-P-2026-0133, applies retroactively to all design patent applications filed before, on, or after its effective date of March 13, 2026. The most significant change is the removal of the longstanding requirement in MPEP § 1504.01(a) that patent drawings depict a physical display screen or panel, in solid or broken lines, for applications directed to computer-generated interfaces or icons. Under the prior approach, examiners were instructed to reject claims under 35 U.S.C. § 171 if the drawings failed to show the display screen. Under the new guidance, that depiction is optional. If both the title and claim properly identify an article of manufacture, for example, “for a computer,” “for a computer display,” or “for a computer system”, no screen needs to appear in the drawings at all. Applicants now have two paths to compliance: the traditional method of showing the display screen in broken lines, or the new method of omitting the screen entirely so long as the title and claim carry the necessary language. The guidance also expressly recognizes, for the first time, that projections, holograms, virtual reality interfaces, and augmented reality interfaces are eligible for design patent protection. To qualify under the new rules, a holographic or projected design must meet two conditions: it must be separate from the computer or system generating it, and it must be more than a transient or disembodied image. A key practical point running throughout the guidance is the importance of the word “for.” Claiming a “paper stack icon for a computer display screen” is compliant; claiming just “paper stack icon” with an identical drawing is rejected as a disembodied image. The same drawing can yield opposite outcomes depending solely on the title and claim language. The USPTO also notes that applications that depict a screen in the drawings but fail to reference it in the title or claim can be amended by updating the words alone, without changing the drawings, bringing them into compliance. Legal professionals broadly welcomed the guidance as a meaningful modernization of examination practice. The guidance constitutes internal examination guidance rather than substantive rulemaking, meaning it does not change the underlying law. Therefore, it is also recommended to file embodiments both with and without the display screen to hedge against existing case law. For more information and more images: | 
