Ever since the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) introduced amendments to its Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy in February 2015, the amended policy has attracted constant criticism at the hands of several patent holders, primarily on account of the highly controversial provisions added by the said amendments. The patent holders, however, weren’t alone in their criticism of the amended policy and found support in the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the European Commission. Both the agencies expressed their concerns regarding the potential negative implications of the 2015 policy change for innovation and competition, amidst calls for the IEEE to consider a review of the said change. An important case in point was the extraordinary step taken by the DOJ to update its 2015 Business Review Letter (BRL) issued to IEEE for the proposed amendments to its IPR Policy. The supplemental BRL, issued in September 2020, replaced the 2015 version while stating that the earlier BRL had been incorrectly cited as an endorsement of the IEEE IPR Policy, and labelling its terms implementer-friendly. The effect of the supplemental BRL, however, was short-lived, with the Biden Administration’s DOJ classifying the 2020 BRL as “advocacy,” and seemingly reinstating the 2015 BRL in April 2021. The latest turn of events in the long-running saga involve the IEEE’s September 2022 decision to update its IPR Policy, with effect from 1st January 2023. The policy update is noteworthy, for it deals with provisions pertaining to the determination of reasonable royalties and injunctive relief; the same set of provisions that were at the heart of the 2015 amendments. Against the above backdrop, the present paper, while focusing on the legal and policy developments in standard-setting in the US, analyses the possible implications of the IPR Policy change introduced by the IEEE in 2022