Photon Legal
IP portfolio audit
You’ve filed 246 applications with an average grant time of 36 months over the last 5 years.
We read all 1,448 patent records Airbnb owns worldwide, and the 587 still alive today. 912 of them came in with the IBM portfolio purchase rather than from Airbnb's own labs, and 719 of those are already dead, 686 of them for unpaid maintenance fees. Airbnb's own research accounts for 473 records, and 384 of those are still alive.
The examination record on Airbnb's own 167 US applications runs to 308 office actions and 73 paid restarts. 105 responses were filed after the statutory 3 months, 24 applications went abandoned before grant, and 2 of those went abandoned in March and May 2026 and are still inside the revival window.
What we looked at
Contents
1,448 patent records carry the Airbnb name worldwide. 587 are still live, 488 granted and 99 in examination. The other 861, 59% of everything on the register, are dead. 686 of those lapsed for unpaid maintenance fees. 912 of the 1,448 records arrived with the IBM portfolio purchase rather than from Airbnb's own research, so the split below is mostly measuring an acquired estate. Section 02 reads Airbnb's own filings on their own.
Airbnb's own filings are in good order. Most are still alive, the grant arrives faster than for anyone else in the peer group, the patent portfolio leads its core reservation class, and it reaches more patent offices than any rival benchmarked here. The programme that turns engineering into filings is working.
This portfolio loses its value at the response deadline and at the renewal date. 24 US applications went abandoned in examination, barely half of all office actions were answered inside the statutory period, and 60 granted patents that earn nothing are still being paid for.
Trip.com holds 1,378 live records to Airbnb's 587, but they reach only 6 patent offices. Airbnb's reach 13. Expedia Group holds 242 and Booking Holdings 71. In the reservation class that describes the product, Airbnb leads everyone.
| Company | Live patent records0 to 1,378, largest first | The patent portfolio spans |
|---|---|---|
| Trip.com | 1,378 | Travel booking, hotels, flights and packages across Greater China and worldwide |
| Airbnb | 587 | Marketplace search, host pricing, trust and identity, payments, the whole patent portfolio |
| Expedia Group | 242 | Online travel agency, lodging, flights and vacation rentals |
| Booking Holdings | 71 | Accommodation booking, restaurant reservations and flight metasearch |
Live records only, so applications still in examination count and dead records do not. Airbnb's 587 excludes the 861 records already dead.
| Class | What it covers, in plain words | Airbnbrecords | Trip.com | Expedia | Booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G06Q10/02 | Reservations, e.g. for tickets, services or events | 92 | 90 | 45 | 22 |
| G06F17/30 | Information retrieval ; Database structures therefor | 89 | 87 | 29 | 19 |
| G06N20/00 | Machine learning | 45 | 22 | 27 | 0 |
| H04L29/08 | Transmission control procedure, e.g. data link level control procedure | 41 | 49 | 6 | 3 |
| H04L29/06 | characterised by a protocol | 38 | 59 | 5 | 1 |
| H04L12/58 | Message switching systems | 36 | 3 | 6 | 1 |
| G06Q30/02 | Marketing, e.g. market research and analysis, surveying, promotions, advertising, buyer profiling, customer management or rewards ; Price estimation or determination | 35 | 57 | 21 | 5 |
| G06Q30/0601 | Electronic shopping [e-shopping] | 33 | 93 | 17 | 4 |
| G06Q10/10 | Office automation, e.g. computer aided management of electronic mail or groupware | 32 | 47 | 5 | 0 |
| G06Q30/06 | Buying, selling or leasing transactions | 32 | 79 | 27 | 12 |
Bold marks the largest holding in each class. Airbnb leads 4 of the 10: reservations, information retrieval, machine learning and message switching. Trip.com leads the 5 commerce classes, and by wide margins in electronic shopping, where it holds 93 records to Airbnb's 33.
Airbnb is the only one of the four present in Germany, the UK, Israel and Korea in any volume. Trip.com's 423 Chinese records are 31% of its whole patent portfolio and do not travel. Booking Holdings, on 71 live records, is absent from 10 of the 14 offices on this sheet.
Airbnb reaches a US grant faster than every company benchmarked here. Against Trip.com that is 15 months of extra enforceable term on every granted record. Photon's ~11-month pace would start protection about 25 months earlier again, on every filing.
An office action is the examiner's written rejection, and it carries a 3-month statutory clock. Across Airbnb's own 167 US applications the examiner mailed 308 of them. 161 were answered inside the period. 105 were answered on a paid extension of time, 22 were never answered at all and the applications went abandoned, and 20 are open on live files today. Just over half of this portfolio's deadlines were met without buying more time.
All 308 office actions mailed on Airbnb's 167 US applications, by outcome.
The statutory period is 3 calendar months from the mail date, with the due date rolled forward off weekends and federal holidays before lateness is tested. Of the 105 late responses, 43 needed 1 extra month, 24 needed 2, 34 needed 3 and 4 needed 5. Source: USPTO Open Data Portal application bundles, 167 Airbnb-originated US utility applications, pulled 10 September 2026.
The examination record of all 167 Airbnb-originated US applications, priced at flat rates.
Share of the 308 office actions across the 167 US applications, by how the examination ran.
204 of the 308 office actions were non-final and 104 were final. 76 of the 167 applications reached a final rejection, 58 were restarted with at least 1 RCE, 13 were restarted twice and 1 three times. 6 applications carry appeal activity on the record, and 17 were allowed without a single office action. The statutory ground argued in each rejection, whether §101, §102 or §103, is not carried in the USPTO event record and is not claimed here.
Each of these was carried through examination and then stopped. On 22 an office action was never answered. 1 answered every office action and lapsed after the final rejection; 1 was allowed and the issue fee was not paid. Whether each was a decision is not visible in the record.
| Application | What it covered | Office actions | RCEs | Modelled cost | How it ended |
|---|
$793,380 of modelled spend sits in these 24 files. That is the whole cost of carrying a file to the point it stopped — prior art search, drafting, the USPTO filing fee, every office action response and every RCE — priced at the same standard rates the section 11 invoices are built on, not the response fees alone. The 2 highlighted went abandoned on 30 March 2026 and 15 May 2026. On both, an applicant-initiated examiner interview was held and summarised on the file, in December 2025 and January 2026, and no response was filed after it. A petition to revive an unintentionally abandoned application under 37 CFR 1.137(a) carries no deadline of its own. Verify current status on Patent Center before acting.
This section looks only at what Airbnb filed itself. Of the 473 records Airbnb, Trooly and Localmind put on the register, 89 are now dead: 40 withdrawn before grant, 38 expired at the end of their term, 8 refused and 3 lost to an unpaid maintenance fee. 47 of them are cited by other companies, 181 times in total. 33 of the dead records are PCT applications allowed to expire without entering a single national phase.
Filed July 2022 on holistic analysis of customer sentiment, and withdrawn before grant. It is cited by WEVO four times, and by Walmart, Truist, Microsoft and Verify once each. The subject matter is live product ground: sentiment analysis across guest and host feedback.
The reusable modular housing system, granted July 2020 and the only Airbnb-filed record lost to an unpaid maintenance fee. It is cited by Blach Construction, Cummins Power Generation and Future Earth three times each, and by Build IP. Every citing party is in modular or prefabricated construction.
Demand prediction for time-expiring inventory, filed July 2016 and withdrawn before grant. Uber cites it twice, alongside ioCurrents, Laundris, Compass Point Retirement Planning, Ption and JD.com. Demand forecasting for perishable inventory is the core of Smart Pricing.
Each node is a company that cites the record, sized and labelled by the number of its publications that do. The centre carries the record's total, which includes Airbnb's own citations of its earlier work; only third parties are drawn on the ring. Direct citing publications from the Google Patents research corpus, counted as distinct citing publication numbers per target. Pulled 10 September 2026.
We read the claim text of the live granted records against what Airbnb ships today, across 14 product areas. Every one of them carries patents, and every one of them also carries features with no claim behind them. The pattern is consistent: the ranking and matching engines are protected, and the surfaces users actually touch are not. Guest Favorites, AirCover, co-host permissions, Reserve Now Pay Later and the whole Services and Experiences marketplace sit unclaimed.
Guest Favorites badge computation based on ratings, reviews, and reliability data.
4 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Flexible carousel discovery showing homes outside strict search criteria; Nearby discovery across homes, services, and experiences; Search-result expansion based on similar price, different amenities, or nearby cities. Against that, 5 are covered: Personalized search-result ranking; Location-based listing ranking; Re-ranking results for location diversity; Split-stay ranking and matching; Availability-aware reservation listing search.
Map-based discovery of nearby landmarks, attractions, and restaurants.
4 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: POI summary and distance display relative to searched or booked homes; Cross-vertical map discovery for homes, services, and experiences; Preference-based map views, where implemented, such as satellite, street, or transit views. Against that, 5 are covered: Map-based representation of reservation listings; Map viewport optimization; Location-aware ranking of places and listings; Graphical representation of reservations; Geographic and time-bounded itinerary generation.
Booking services in connection with a stay.
4 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Coordinating homes, services, and experiences in a single app flow; Group reservation access controls for booker and invited guests; Reservation-linked group messaging and profile sharing. Against that, 5 are covered: Automated booking availability determination; Reservation-search workflow; Group travel system within an online marketplace; Inviting companions or co-travelers to view reservations; Similar-accommodation determination for rebooking or substitution.
Smart Pricing explainability for hosts.
5 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: One-tap adoption of improved price tips; Date-specific pricing and cancellation policy controls; Pricing and availability rule interactions across host calendars; Earnings trend analytics tied to pricing decisions. Against that, 5 are covered: Demand prediction for time-expiring inventory; Price-tip generation based on request likelihood; ML-based reservation value modeling; Regression-tree utilization prediction; Host action ranking for pricing decisions.
Multi-calendar management for hosts with multiple listings.
5 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Rule-set management across listings and dates; Task management for hosting teams; Occupancy tax insights; Multi-listing performance comparison and analytics. Against that, 5 are covered: Auto-generation of listing information; Host preference determination; Host/listing recommendation logic; Host standards for listings; Listing-management user interfaces.
Granular co-host permissions for calendar and messaging access.
4 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Co-host access models across homes, services, and experiences; Co-host ratings and performance display; Co-host payout handling- Co-host licensing, insurance, or qualification checks for services and experiences. Against that, 3 are covered: Co-hosting user interfaces; Optimized co-host ranking and matching; Co-host marketplace discovery concepts.
Message editing within a defined time window.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Emoji reactions to messages; Photo and video sharing after confirmed reservations; Gallery view for reservation-linked media; Group message threads for guests, hosts, co-hosts, and co-travelers; Read receipts and team-level message management. Against that, 5 are covered: ML-based conversation systems; Real-time issue detection in guest-host messages; Virtual-agent evaluation; Omnichannel support context sharing; Selective pre-translation of web or message content.
AirCover damage-protection workflow.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Reservation screening workflow; Host liability insurance eligibility workflow; Experiences and Services liability coverage workflows; License and insurance verification for service and experience hosts; Safety-line escalation and case handling. Against that, 5 are covered: Identity and trustworthiness verification; Identity and age verification; Neural-network verification models; Personalized fraud-detection rules; Interactive authentication workflows.
Daily Guest Favorites eligibility evaluation.
5 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Reliability-data normalization for badge eligibility; Percentile/highlight logic for top homes; Service and experience review-quality scoring; Review authenticity or abuse-detection workflows. Against that, 4 are covered: ML-generated ranking of user reviews; Review snippet generation; Descriptive listing and location attributes; Review/reputation signals used in ranking.
Collaborative wishlist notes.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Up/down voting on saved listings; Guest-count and date changes inside shared wishlists; Profile sharing among group travelers; Post-trip Connections; Experience guest visibility through “Who’s going” features. Against that, 4 are covered: Organizing wishlists in an online marketplace; Group travel planning; Co-traveler invitation workflows; Contextual sharing of reservation information.
Service booking by city, date, service type, location, time, and guest count.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Service-provider qualification display; Service pricing and offering configuration; Provider-to-guest or guest-to-provider location coordination; Service host licensing and insurance checks; Service-specific co-host management. Against that, 3 are covered: Indirect coverage through marketplace search, booking, co-hosting, and reservation systems; General listing discovery and booking infrastructure; General identity and host-verification infrastructure.
“Who’s going” visibility before booking an experience.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Direct messaging between experience guests; Post-experience Connections; Guest requirements based on age, skill, certification, or safety criteria; Private group experience booking; Recurring experience calendar scheduling. Against that, 4 are covered: Travel-experience discovery; Experience search and reservation concepts; Private/public ticketed reservation integration; Local venue or activity discovery logic.
Reserve Now, Pay Later.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Payout timing based on reservation type and payout method; Co-host payout calculation and release handling; Earnings dashboard for upcoming, paid, and year-to-date earnings; Monthly and yearly earnings reports; Transaction filtering by payout method, listing, and date. Against that, 4 are covered: Multi-point payment authentication; Fraud-detection logic for transactions; Payment-security workflows; Group-travel payment-adjacent workflows.
Privacy controls for profile sharing.
6 features in this area have no claim we could find behind them: Experience-specific profile sharing settings; Connections visibility controls; Two-factor authentication for account security; AI-model training opt-out and privacy-preference management; Accessibility preferences propagated into search and booking workflows. Against that, 4 are covered: Account-creation UI- Interactive story-based authentication; Identity verification and trust scoring; Accessibility measurement systems; Profile/reputation-related UI concepts.
Unprotected here means no live granted claim we could find reaches the feature, read against the claim text of the live granted records in this portfolio. Product descriptions are taken from Airbnb's own public product surfaces. It is not a patentability opinion, and a granted claim held by someone else may still block.
Two savings sit in this portfolio and they are independent of each other. 60 granted patents earn nothing, carry no litigation or licensing signal, and cost a modelled $348,075 a year to keep. Separately, filing the next 50 patents at 1 fixed fee instead of the market rate saves $850,000. Together that is $1,198,075 a year, and $5.99M over five.
We scored all 488 granted records on forward citations, citation recency, how far the prior art sits behind the priority date, term remaining and field density. Anything under 10 years old is kept unscored, because renewal is cheap and the term ahead is long. Filter the list, tick the records you disagree with, and the totals move with you.
| Record | Title | Office | Age | Score10 is best · auto = under 10 years, kept unscored | Renewal, per yearmodelled | Our call |
|---|
Bought the way they are bought today, 50 new US patents cost $1,750,000. At 1 fixed fee per patent the investment is $900,000, agreed before the work starts. Every office action, every examiner interview and the US lawyer fee sit inside it, so the bill does not move when examination runs long. On this portfolio that matters: 105 of the last 308 office actions needed a paid extension, and 73 needed a paid restart.
$35,000 is the market rate for a US patent taken from filing through to grant. 50 filings a year is the figure used here. Airbnb's own originated filings across all offices averaged 48 a year across 2021 to 2025, so 50 is close to the pace it already runs; its US utility filings alone averaged 15 a year over the same period. The flat fee is the rate quoted at the end of this report.
The trademark portfolio is large and mostly in order: 1,107 of the 1,650 marks are registered and 268 more are pending, across 119 registers. What it does not cover is the product line. Airbnb Originals, Co-Host Network, AIRBNB LUXE, Airbnb Experiences, Airbnb Services, Airbnb.org, Airbnb Newsroom and Airbnb for Work are all in active commercial use and none of them is registered anywhere. Meanwhile 274 marks have lapsed or expired, and SUPERHOST is already registered to a private individual in Argentina.
274 marks, 16.6% of the register, are Ended or Expired. They include HOST WITH PRIDE, STAY WITH PRIDE, TRAVEL WITH PRIDE and H Hotel Tonight across Norway, Colombia, Mexico and Argentina. Some of that is deliberate pruning. In many jurisdictions an expired registration opens a window for a third party to file the same mark in the same class, and that window can be taken quickly.
| Device | Mark | Application no. | Register | Classes | Status | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word mark | ARcover | TM2024002917 | Malaysia | 36 | Filed | Selvi Shyamala A/P R Manoharan; Sharmini A/P K Ganasegaran |
 | AIRECOVER | M4276303 | Spain | 35 | Registered | BELIEVE LYB, S.L. |
| Word mark | WONDERTAX LABS | 99385079 | United States | 42 | Filed | WonderTax Labs LLC |
 | WONDER | 11003341 | European Union | 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 43, 44 | Registered | WONDERBOX S.A.S. |
 | Wondrlab | 4737968 | India | 42 | Registered | WONDRLAB INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED |
| Word mark | LUXURY | 168942000 | Canada | 35 | Registered | BLACK CARD LLC |
| Word mark | LUXURY ESCAPES | 199905900 | Canada | 35, 38, 39, 41, 43 | Registered | Luxury Escapes Travel Pty Ltd |
 | Superhost | 3645604 | Argentina | 38 | Registered | SILBERFADEN IGNACIO 100.00% |
| Superhost | 3645603 | Argentina | 35 | Registered | SILBERFADEN IGNACIO 100.00% |
 | Superhost | 3510587 | Mexico | 43 | Filed | MARIO MENDOZA CABRERA, CUAHUTEMOC RICARDO LOPEZ NACIF |
 | AIR-SYA | 49694950 | China | 35 | Registered | Stark Industrial Automation Co., Ltd. |
| Word mark | AERO SEVA | 4284484 | India | 35 | Filed | AERO HAWKS PRIVATE LIMITED. |
| Word mark | OPENAIR | 76000626 | USA | 35 | Registered | NETSUITE INC. |
SUPERHOST is registered to a private individual in Argentina in Classes 35 and 38, and filed by third parties in Mexico in Class 43, Airbnb's core class in a market with 27 existing Airbnb registrations. AIRECOVER is registered in Spain, inside the EUIPO territory, in the same class in which AirCover operates. ARcover is filed in Malaysia in Class 36. WONDER is registered across the full EU in 7 classes and constrains the WONDERLABS brand there. Each of these is an opposition, cancellation or watch decision with its own clock.
| Device | Mark | Classes | Where to file | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word mark | Airbnb Originals | 35, 41, 43 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Australia, Canada and 15 more | Promoted globally as a curated stay category. No registration in any jurisdiction. |
| Word mark | Co-Host Network | 35, 38, 43 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Australia, Canada and 15 more | Launched as a standalone branded product connecting owners with professional co-hosts. No filings anywhere. |
| Word mark | AIRBNB LUXE | 35, 39, 43 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Australia, Canada and 15 more | In use since the 2019 Luxury Retreats acquisition. LUXURY and LUXURY ESCAPES are already registered in Canada in overlapping classes, so the filing route there needs care. |
| Word mark | Airbnb Experiences | 35, 39, 41, 43 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Australia, Canada and 15 more | A primary revenue vertical in over 1,000 cities. The portfolio holds only a non-standard singular variant that does not protect the mark as it is used. |
| Word mark | Airbnb Services | 35, 41, 43, 44 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Canada, Australia and 12 more | Used in platform terms, user agreements and product communications globally. No registrations identified. |
 | Airbnb.org (device mark) | 36, 38, 43, 45 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Canada, Australia and 12 more | Device mark proposed for the humanitarian classes. File the word mark in parallel. |
| Word mark | Airbnb.org | 36, 38, 43, 45 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Canada, Australia and 12 more | The nonprofit arm coordinating emergency housing. No word-mark filings despite active operations in multiple countries. |
| Word mark | Airbnb Newsroom | 35, 38, 41 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Canada, Australia and 11 more | The official global press portal at newsroom.airbnb.com. No filings anywhere. |
| Word mark | Airbnb for Work | 35, 39, 43 | US, United Kingdom, EUIPO, Canada, Australia and 16 more | The B2B corporate travel product with its own dashboard and billing. No registrations in any jurisdiction. |
Clarity of budget
01
Every step is a separate bill today, and every office action a fresh one. On 1 Airbnb file that meant 8 office actions, 2 paid restarts and 5 paid extensions over 6 years and 8 months, about $35,000 at standard rates.
02
Each firm sends its own list. Nobody’s job is the merge.
Certainty of outcome
03
We only file what we expect to win. 97% of what we file is granted, against about 55% across the industry.
04
The gap is rounds of examination, and in an hourly model every round is another bill.
How we deliver both
05
Pulse scores every disclosure before an attorney sees it. Only the ideas with a real shot go forward.
06
Marketplace, reservation and pricing systems get attorneys who have argued §101 in the 3600 art units before, where 80 of your 167 US applications sit, and who can put a technical improvement in front of an examiner.
07
1 person reads your patent. Some grant almost everything, some almost nothing. Their record is public, so we read it first.
08
Most firms send a lawyer to argue for the inventor. We bring the person who built it.
How we work
09
We don’t wait for you to send an invention.
10
We are paid when the patent is granted. If the patent is refused, you get your money back.
11
Hourly billing pays for time. A fixed fee pays for the grant.
A traditional law firm charges $35,000 for the same US patent taken from filing through to grant, billed step by step, with a fresh bill for every office action. On this portfolio's own record that is 308 office actions and 73 restarts on 167 applications.
All out-of-pocket expenses, including foreign lawyer fees and government fees, are billed separately at actuals.
Every client has clarity on investment & certainty of outcome from Day 0.
Hear it directly from the founders, CTOs and inventors whose patents we file.
Founder
“We now have 19 patents granted and 51 filed worldwide, and that simply wouldn’t have been possible without the partnership, speed, and global reach of Photon Legal. Amit Koshal and his team have been instrumental: fast, cost-effective, and deeply strategic in helping us protect breakthrough neurotechnology across continents.”
Jonathan BerentChief Executive Officer, NextSenseInventor
“Photon Legal’s unique approach to uncovering patent-worthy ideas has helped us identify innovations we previously overlooked. We look forward to continuing our partnership as we bring new ideas to help B2B revenue teams.”
Viral BajariaCo-Founder and Chief Technology Officer, 6senseFounder
“Photon Legal has been instrumental in helping us secure our IP, especially in markets like the US, Europe, and Canada, where having a strong patent portfolio can open up additional revenue streams.”
Imbesat AhmadCo-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, FiloInventor
“I had filed two patents last year also, but that process, the document review, writing, reviewing and then filing, it took around ten months. I know the pain, right? So ten months I have to chase with the attorney. And this time it was very smooth. I didn’t realize how we concluded so soon.”
Saumya GiriSenior Staff Engineer, Automation Anywhere
Set up a call with Amit Koshalamit@photonlegal.com
Total you were asked for
$35,0006 invoices
Total you would be asked for
$18,0001 invoice
Priced at the standard rates below, for a patent that draws 2 office actions and issues. This file drew 8, with 2 RCEs and 5 paid extensions on top of the total above. The first office action was mailed in May 2015 and the patent granted in November 2019, 2,428 days after filing.
Total you were asked for
$35,0005 invoices
Net cost after refund
$0 (Refund)1 invoice
The same rates and the same 2 office actions. The second was a final rejection, answered on 10 October 2025, which is the dearer step and carries the total to the same $35,000 without an issue fee ever being reached. A third office action was mailed on 29 October 2025 and never answered, and the file went abandoned on 15 May 2026. No patent issued, so the full amount is a sunk cost today, and a petition under 37 CFR 1.137(a) could still bring this file back.
Both panels use the same standard rate card: prior-art search at $2,500, drafting at $18,800, the USPTO filing fee at $1,820, a response to an office action at $5,000, a response after final at $6,880 and the issue fee at $1,880 - $35,000 for a patent either way. It is not Airbnb invoice data. RCE fees and paid extensions are counted in section 05 and excluded here, so both totals are conservative.