On March 13, 2026, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued updated guidance governing how it examines design patents for digital interfaces — the look and feel of on-screen icons, dashboards, menus, and similar visual elements. The changes also open the door to protection for next-generation experiences such as projected displays, holograms, and virtual and augmented reality environments. The new guidance is effective immediately and applies to both new and pending patent applications.

Why Should a Life Sciences Company Care?

If your company builds or licenses software, whether a patient-facing mobile app, a clinical data dashboard, a diagnostic imaging interface, or an AR-assisted surgical tool, the visual design of that software may now be significantly easier to protect through a U.S. design patent. Design patents cover the ornamental appearance of a product, yet until now the USPTO required applicants to satisfy narrow filing requirements for digital designs that were perceived by some as rigid and misaligned with how modern innovations actually work. The new guidance removes several of those hurdles.

What Changed, in Plain Terms

No more requirement to depict the physical device. Previously, patenting the look of an icon or interface required including the screen or device in the drawings. This requirement has been eliminated. Applicants may now focus on the design itself, so long as the application makes clear the design is intended for use on a computer, display, or similar device.

More natural product descriptions are now accepted. Rather than forcing awkward titles like "display screen with graphical user interface," the USPTO now permits straightforward descriptions such as "icon for a display screen" or "virtual reality interface for a computer". Patent filings may now more closely match how companies actually name and market their products.

Projected, holographic, VR, and AR designs are explicitly eligible. The USPTO has confirmed that designs extending beyond a traditional flat screen, for example, a holographic anatomy model, a projected surgical planning interface, or an AR overlay used during a procedure, can qualify for design patent protection. The key requirement is that the design must be connected to a device or computer system, not merely a floating image with no link to any product.

Limits remain. A purely decorative image, a standalone piece of digital art, or a graphic not connected to any product or device is still ineligible for a design patent. For instance, an icon described simply as a "paper stack icon" with no reference to a computer or display would be rejected. Where protection for those kinds of assets is desired, trademark or copyright, not a design patent, remains the appropriate IP protection tool.

Strategic Takeaways

Audit your digital product portfolio. Review the interfaces, icons, and visual elements across your software products, from patient portals and companion apps to lab instruments and diagnostic platforms. Any distinctive visual design tied to a device or system is a candidate for design patent protection, and the filing process is now simpler.

Think beyond the screen. If your company is developing or investing in AR-assisted surgery, VR-based training, holographic imaging, or projected display technology, these designs can now be patented more readily. Identify the visual elements that differentiate your product and consider filing early.

Layer your IP protection. A single digital asset may warrant multiple forms of coverage: a design patent for the interface's visual appearance, a trademark if the look functions as a brand identifier, and copyright for underlying artwork. Work with your IP counsel to determine the right combination for your most valuable assets.

Review pending filings. Design patent applications already in the pipeline may benefit from updated descriptions or simplified drawings under the new rules. A targeted review with your IP attorneys could strengthen those applications at minimal cost.

Timing and Next Steps

The new guidance is already in effect, and the USPTO is accepting public comments for 60 days following publication. Although the guidance governs how patent examiners evaluate applications rather than the underlying patent statute, it sets the practical standard against which your applications will be measured by the USPTO.

Open Questions to Watch

Despite these seemingly simplifying changes, the guidance raises several unresolved legal questions that companies should monitor.

First, the guidance permits applicants to satisfy the "article of manufacture" requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 171 solely through title and claim language, without visually depicting the article in the drawings. This represents a departure from prior precedent, and patents obtained under the relaxed standard may carry validity risk if challenged in court.

Second, the guidance draws a critical distinction between protectable designs and unprotectable "transient or disembodied" images, yet defines "transient" only as meaning "the design is not a visual characteristic of the article of manufacture" which is a circular formulation that may lead to inconsistent examiner treatment until clarified through practice or litigation.

Third, the removal of drawing requirements, combined with a non-exhaustive list of acceptable claim formulations, could broadly expand design patent eligibility in ways that increase the risk of infringement disputes and the cost of design clearance for companies in competitive markets.

Finally, because the guidance applies retroactively to all pending applications and proceedings yet is characterized as internal guidance rather than substantive rulemaking companies with existing design patents examined under the prior, stricter standard may find their patents coexisting with newer patents evaluated under materially different criteria, with limited formal recourse if the guidance is applied inconsistently.

Now is a good time to talk to your IP team about whether your portfolio reflects the full value of your digital assets.