On March 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced the launch of the Advanced Air Mobility and Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) Integration Pilot Program (eIPP).[1] The FAA selected eight multi‑state projects to begin real‑world operations as early as summer 2026. The announcement marks a pivotal moment for the advanced air mobility (AAM) industry. For the first time, the federal government has provided a structured pathway for a variety of AAM operations in the national airspace before full FAA type certification is complete. While certification remains the ultimate gatekeeper to unrestricted operations, the eIPP represents a meaningful shift from conceptual planning to operational reality.
At the same time, the eIPP arrives amid escalating intellectual property (IP) disputes among leading eVTOL manufacturers. In particular, Archer Aviation and Joby Aviation, both leading participants in the eIPP, are pursuing claims against their competitors for patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and false advertising.
The eIPP will therefore not only accelerate airspace integration but will also underscore the value of secure IP rights in an emerging commercial market.
eIPP Participants and Operational Scope
The DOT and FAA selected a small group of OEMs to anchor state and region led partnerships across the country.
- Archer Aviation is a partner in several eIPP initiatives, including projects led by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the Texas Department of Transportation, among others. Archer’s Midnight aircraft is positioned as a flagship platform for early passenger and regional operations.
- Joby Aviation is a partner in multiple state‑led projects spanning the Northeast, Texas, and the western U.S. Joby’s S4 platform is one of the most advanced eVTOL aircraft currently engaged in flight testing and certification activities.
- Additional OEM participants include BETA Technologies, Electra, Wisk, Ampaire, Elroy Air, and Reliable Robotics, each contributing aircraft or operational concepts tailored to cargo, regional, or autonomous missions.
Indeed, the eIPP is not limited to flying taxis, or even VTOL aircraft. Reliable Robotics, for example, is partnering with the City of Albuquerque to use autonomous commercial cargo aircraft throughout the Four Corners region.[2] As another example, Electra, an OEM manufacturing a short take-off and landing (STOL) vehicle is partnering with multiple state agencies to conduct cargo, emergency medical response, and passenger flights.[3]
Less Talk, More Testing
Unlike earlier FAA initiatives that emphasized rulemaking or targeted one-off demonstrations, the eIPP is designed to generate operational data through live deployments involving multiple government entities, OEMs, and operators. Although full type certification remains a prerequisite for broad commercial operations, the eIPP enables meaningful, supervised activity within the national airspace. These operations will inform certification pathways, infrastructure planning, and future regulatory frameworks, effectively shaping the rules of the market while the market is still forming.
Joby v. Archer: Litigation at the Center of the Pilot Program
As discussed in our prior article, “Turbulence in the eVTOL IP Wars – Joby Attempts to Ground Archer“, the rivalry between Joby and Archer has extended into aggressive IP enforcement, including allegations of patent infringement, trade‑secret misappropriation, and false advertising.
In recent days, the dispute has heated up as both manufacturers emerge as central participants in the eIPP.
Most recently, Archer fought back against Joby by (1) challenging Joby’s “Made-in-America” advertising, alleging that the claim is false or misleading, which could have direct implications for Joby’s role in government-partnered programs[4]; and (2) filing a complaint at the International Trade Commission (ITC) alleging that Joby imports electric aircraft, power systems, and components that infringe multiple Archer patents.
A few weeks ago, Archer also sued another eVTOL manufacturer, UK-based Vertical Aerospace, for patent infringement of several patents concerning aircraft structures and design.[5]
These actions place IP enforcement squarely at the heart of the pilot program.
Why the ITC is a Powerful Enforcement Forum in the eIPP Era
The ITC presents a uniquely potent forum for patent and trade secret disputes, especially in the AAM industry. Unlike district‑court litigation, the ITC focuses exclusively on importation, a critical vulnerability in an industry that relies heavily on foreign‑sourced materials, battery cells, and engine components. ITC investigations also proceed on accelerated timelines and offer remedies that are uniquely disruptive in a pre‑commercial market, including limited exclusion orders barring infringing products from entering the United States.
In the context of the eIPP, this leverage is amplified. An adverse ITC determination could impair an OEM’s ability to import aircraft or components needed for pilot‑program operations, certification testing, or demonstrations and data collection. Such restrictions could effectively sideline a participant from the eIPP designed to shape future regulatory standards long before the merits of a dispute are fully resolved elsewhere.
Government Partnerships May Protect Participants from Patent Infringement Claims
The public-private partnerships that define the eIPP may also complicate traditional patent-enforcement strategies. Indeed, if an eIPP participant manufactures an allegedly infringing product for the government and with the government’s authorization, the OEM may be immune from liability for patent infringement.[6] In those circumstances, the patent holder’s remedy may be limited to seeking monetary compensation from the government in the Court of Federal Claims. While this framework does not eliminate IP risk for new entrants, it reshapes enforcement incentives, particularly where government sponsorship is central to early operations and market positioning.
Innovation Policy Meets Competitive Reality
The eIPP reflects a clear policy objective: ensuring that the United States leads the global deployment of advanced air mobility technologies. That objective, however, coexists with a robust IP regime designed to protect innovation and reward early investment.
The Joby-Archer conflict illustrates the tension between these goals. Both companies are positioned by regulators as leaders worthy of inclusion in the eIPP, yet each is simultaneously attempting to constrain the other’s freedom to operate through litigation. In a market where only a handful of OEMs are likely to achieve scale, IP disputes may function less as peripheral skirmishes and more as strategic tools for shaping industry structure, determining supply chains, and influencing which platforms ultimately reach certification and deployment.
The eIPP confirms that advanced air mobility has entered a new phase defined not just by technological readiness, but by legal positioning and competitive strategy. More than a regulatory experiment, the eIPP accelerates the industry into a commercial environment where participants will need to balance IP protection, enforcement, and product development to ensure they are an industry leader when the pilot program concludes. For eIPP participants, success will hinge not just on aircraft performance or operational data, but on the ability to navigate an increasingly complex intersection of regulation, government partnership, and intellectual property risk.
[1] https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/future-aviation-here-trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-and-faa-unveil
[2] https://reliable.co/pr/reliable-selected-eIPP-regional-cargo-aviation
[3] https://www.electra.aero/news/electras-commitment-to-advancing-the-eipp
[4] https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/archer-accuses-joby-of-fraud-over-alleged-china-ties/166601.article
[5] https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/advanced-air-mobility/archer-sues-vertical-over-alleged-patent-infringement
[6] 28 U.S.C § 1498(a)
