A man from Iowa has filed a lawsuit in federal court against Nintendo and The Pokémon Company International after being denied the "Pokémon Professor" certification.
📒- Man denied "Pokémon Professor" certification due to background check files antitrust lawsuit
- Claims "economic opportunities and regional revitalization prospects associated with the certification have vanished"
- Seeking $341,000 in damages and certification; experts suggest the antitrust argument is a stretch

'Why can't I be a Pokémon Professor!' Man sues Nintendo
Professor Oak, a character from the games and a Pokémon Professor © The Pokémon Company

A man named Kyle Owens claims that despite passing the Pokémon Professor certification exam, his certification was denied based on the results of a background check. The Iowa Capital Dispatch reported that he is seeking $341,000 in damages and the granting of his certification, citing violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
The incident dates back to March 2024, when Owens was notified by The Pokémon Company International that he had passed the foundational exam for the "Pokémon Professor" program. A mandatory background check followed, and on May 6 of the same year, The Pokémon Company International denied his application based on the results. Along with the rejection notice, Owens' exam score was changed from the perfect score he initially claimed to 80.
In his complaint, Owens alleges that the company initially cited a criminal record from over a decade ago as the reason for rejection, but later changed the justification to three misdemeanors for which he was never convicted. The background check reportedly revealed arrest warrants from other states related to truancy, disorderly conduct, possession of an offensive weapon, and criminal mischief.
"Pokémon Professor" is an official certification program named after the Professor characters in the Pokémon games and anime. It operates under The Pokémon Company's "Play! Pokémon" program. Those who earn the certification can serve as judges, assistants, or ambassadors at official events. It also provides opportunities to participate as staff in international tournaments and the authority to host local leagues or events.
While the Pokémon Professor role is not a salaried position, those who act as tournament organizers can collect entry fees. For those who operate game shops, it can also lead to increased customer traffic. Owens reportedly emphasized that this certification is more than just a hobby, as it involves tangible economic activity.
He argues that his rejection goes beyond personal harm, claiming it excludes a qualified organizer from running official Pokémon events in the Iowa region. He asserts that Nintendo and The Pokémon Company are artificially restricting competition by exclusively controlling the Professor certification system.
He used antitrust law as his legal basis for this claim. In fact, some analysts suggest that because he is not a party to a contract and the civil litigation is ambiguous, antitrust law was the only legal theory he could invoke. Furthermore, there is a consensus that his argument is a significant stretch, and the lawsuit is likely intended to pressure the company into a re-evaluation of his certification rather than a genuine antitrust case.
It is reported that Nintendo and The Pokémon Company International have not yet released an official statement regarding the matter.