WorkflowIntellectual Property

Patent Drafting

Patent drafting software that turns an invention disclosure into claims and a specification that agree, with a paragraph behind each claim term before the attorney starts reading.

Follow one catheter disclosure to its first draft ↓
Watch with transcript →
The problem

Claims and description written apart, then reconciled by reading both

The disclosure arrives as a form, a folder of sketches and an hour of interview notes. The attorney settles the claims, an associate writes the description, and someone then reads claims against description to prove each claim term has a paragraph and each numeral in the drawings turns up in the text.

The width of the first claim is often chosen before the closest art is laid out. Questions for the inventor surface one at a time, mid-section. Fallback claims pile up and the count slides past the fee thresholds without anyone deciding it should. On a fixed fee, each extra pass comes out of margin.

Built forPatent attorneysPatent agentsAssociatesIP paralegals

The Problem Today

The claims and the specification must agree word for word, and one fixed fee pays for writing both and proving it.

$12,000
median charge for a relatively complex application published
46%
of practitioners say most clients push for fee cuts published

Written and checked by hand today

  • Claims
  • Description
  • Figures
  • Prior art
  • Support traced by eyeClaim terms and numerals followed through the text, line by line
  • Claim width set by feelToo broad meets the art; too narrow is easy to design around

The Solution

  1. Elements found and citedDisclosure, interview and drawings read; each element tied to its source
  2. Three widths for the first claimBroad, medium and narrow, each set against its closest prior art
  3. Claim tree and descriptionDependents as fallbacks; each section written in the firm’s style
  4. Support meter fullEach claim term linked to its paragraph; the attorney approves

Built-in controls

  • Only the attorney picks the width and signs
  • Gaps go to the inventor, never filled by guess
  • No invention data feeds model training

What You Get

Practitioners spend their hours on claim strategy, and each draft reaches them with its claim support already checked.

12 hours
of attorney review and edits, from 30–40 of drafting our estimate
  • No surprise claim feesTotal and independent counts checked against the fee thresholds
  • Figures that match the textEach numeral checked in the drawings and the text, both ways
  • Inventors asked onceQuestions gathered and approved, answers cited in the draft
Disclosure to first draft

How the patent drafting software builds one catheter application

From the cited element list to the filing check, each feature in the sequence drafting follows: what it does, and whose problem it solves.

  1. 01Elements of the invention

    Invention elements, each cited to a disclosure page or interview minute

    How it works

    • Reads the disclosure, interview notes, drawings, search report and style guide as five inputs
    • Lists elements E1 to E12, each linked to its page or interview minute
    • Shows which inventor contributed each element, for the attorney’s inventorship call
    • Marks which claim each element lands in once the claims are drafted

    AssociateBegins from a cited list of what the inventors built; nobody rereads eleven pages and an hour of notes to find it.

  2. 02Question to the inventor

    Questions for the inventor, drafted where the disclosure goes silent

    How it works

    • The specification writer drafts a question wherever the disclosure leaves a gap
    • An associate or the attorney approves each question before it goes out
    • Sent through the client’s private matter link
    • Each answer is cited in the draft; this one will be Q5

    AssociatePuts each gap in front of the inventor once, in his own terms, so the description holds only what he actually built.

  3. 03Claim widths compared

    The first claim drafted broad, medium and narrow against the closest art

    How it works

    • Each width written out in full, its elements lettered for the comparison
    • Each element marked against references D1, D2 and D3, the passage one click away
    • Broad reads on D1, which shows 4 of 4 elements
    • Medium leaves D2 at 4 of 5: no reference shows a spiral track driving two wires

    Patent attorneyChooses the claim’s reach with the closest art laid out element by element, rather than by feel before the search is mapped.

  4. 04Width picked

    The signing attorney picks the width, and the reason goes on record

    How it works

    • Only a registered patent attorney may pick a width
    • A reason is chosen from a short list and recorded with the pick
    • Claims 1, 9 and 15 take the width, and the 17 dependents follow them
    • Agents draft all three widths; the choice stays with the attorney

    Patent attorneyKeeps the one strategic call in the application with the person who signs it, and leaves a reason a reviewer can read later.

  5. 05Drafting studio

    A claim tree drafted to the chosen width, beside its specification

    How it works

    • 20 claims: three independent, the catheter, the handle assembly and the method, with 17 dependents beneath
    • Clicking a claim lights its terms; clicking a term opens its paragraph
    • The meter counts 46 of 46 terms described and 31 of 31 numerals used
    • Antecedent basis reads 20 of 20 claims

    Patent attorneySees the claim family and the paragraph behind each term on one screen, so review time goes into the claims instead of proving the description mentions them.

  6. 06Specification

    A specification written section by section to the firm’s style guide

    How it works

    • 38 pages in seven sections and 112 numbered paragraphs, each section with its page count
    • Claim terms highlighted in the paragraphs that describe them
    • Style checks shown beside it: comprising preambles, no means-for language, one name per part
    • The abstract runs 138 of 150 words; one section can be redrafted alone

    AssociateStarts from a description already in the house style and edits it section by section; the detailed description never begins as a blank page.

  7. 07Figures and numerals

    Reference numerals checked both ways, between the drawings and the text

    How it works

    • A grid of 31 numerals against nine figures, with the paragraphs that use each one
    • Pointing at a numeral lights it in the drawing: here spiral track 126 in FIG. 3
    • Numerals run in hundreds, one per part
    • The grid reads 31 of 31 used both ways

    Patent agentCatches a numeral that sits in a drawing but never in the text before it comes back as a drawing objection.

  8. 08Closest art per claim

    Every claim mapped to its closest reference, element by element

    How it works

    • For all 20 claims, a bar per reference shows how many elements it holds
    • D2 is closest for most claims, and D3 for claims 10, 11 and 13
    • No reference shows any claim in full
    • The 14 references of the search report sit beside the grid, all on the information disclosure statement (IDS)

    Patent attorneyKnows where each fallback stands against the closest art before the first office action, without building a separate claim chart.

  9. 09Filing check

    Claim fees, abstract length and the IDS counted before anyone files

    How it works

    • 20 of 20 claims and 3 of 3 independent: excess claim fees of $0
    • A 138-word abstract, and 14 references with no size fee
    • Inventor review and two declarations tracked as the open items
    • Approval waits on two statements the attorney confirms

    IP paralegalAssembles the package against counts already checked, and sees what a 21st claim would cost before an associate adds one.

Claim 1 three ways: broad reads on D1, medium leaves D2 one element short

The three widths of the catheter claim against the 14 references, and the width the attorney picked.

WidthElementsClosest artThe art mapper’s read
Broad4D1 shows 4 of 4Reads on D1 with a rocker lever: expect a novelty rejection on the first action
Medium, picked5D2 shows 4 of 5No reference shows a spiral track driving two wires; expect an obviousness argument from D2 with D3
Narrow6D2 shows 4 of 6Clearest of the art, but easy to design around; kept as dependent claims 5 and 6
Around the studio

Six other screens of the catheter draft, from the first widths to the log

Opened by the attorney and the associate beside the claim tree.

Before a width is pickedClaim 1 waits at three widths, each with its closest art. The description and numerals are drafted; the meter waits for claims.
An element traced to the interviewOpening the Interview 14:09 citation shows the inventor’s own words behind the rotating cam element, as the notes recorded them.
The passage behind a markEach mark in the width comparison opens the reference text. Here D1 ¶[0042]: a rocker lever pulls the first wire while the second is paid out.
Two fixes, each approved by a personNumeral 142 added to ¶[0058], and helical groove renamed spiral track in 14 paragraphs. Agents proposed both; the associate approved them.
The associate’s edit, trackedShow edits marks what a person changed. In the background, the associate struck a line calling earlier devices cumbersome.
Drafting steps and approvals, by timeAgent steps and the approvals people gave, listed by time from the disclosure upload through the attorney’s sign-off for inventor review.

Detent notch 142 had no paragraph, and the spiral track had two names

Found while the catheter application was drafted, each fixed or flagged before the attorney’s review.

A numeral in FIG. 6 the text left out

Detent notch 142 appeared in FIG. 6 but in no paragraph. The support checker flagged it, and the fix that added it to ¶[0058] was approved by the associate.

Two names for one part

The interview notes said helical groove where the claims say spiral track. One name now runs through 14 paragraphs, so the claim term reads one way in the description.

A broad claim one reference already shows

D1 shows all four elements of the broad width with a rocker lever. The art mapper’s read was a novelty rejection on the first action, and the attorney picked medium.

A detent lock none of the three shows

Claims 5, 6, 14 and 17 carry the detent lock, and none of D1 to D3 shows it. Claims 5 and 6 hold the narrow width as a fallback.

The attorney picks the width and signs; the associate edits but cannot sign

Agents draft. Each decision on the claims has one role behind it.

Patent attorney
Sees
The three widths against the art, the support meter and the filing check
Signs
Picks the width and records why, approves the draft for inventor review and signs the filing
Associate
Sees
The specification sections, the inventor questions and each proposed fix
Signs
Approves fixes and questions to the inventor, and edits claims and sections
IP paralegal
Sees
The filing package, the IDS and the claim counts against the fee thresholds
Signs
Assembles the package and the IDS, and cannot change a claim
Inventor
Sees
The questions that need an answer, then the full draft
Signs
Answers through the matter link, reviews the draft for technical accuracy and signs a declaration
IP practice chair
Sees
The firm style guide, role grid and retention settings
Signs
Changes the style guide and the drafting rules

Before patent drafting software writes a first draft for you

What is patent drafting software?

Patent drafting software turns an invention disclosure into claims and a specification. This solution lists the invention’s elements with citations, drafts the first claim at three widths against the closest art, drafts the claim tree and the description, and checks that each claim term has a paragraph behind it. The attorney picks the width, edits and signs.

Can AI patent drafting write an application on its own?

It writes a first draft for a practitioner to edit. Agents draft each width but leave the pick to the attorney, add no technical matter the inventor did not give them, and do not file. When the disclosure is silent, a question goes to the inventor once an associate or the attorney approves it.

How does the claim support check work?

The support checker links each claim term to the paragraph that describes it, runs an antecedent basis check claim by claim, and checks each reference numeral both ways between the drawings and the text. It flags gaps and proposes fixes, a person approves each one, and it cannot clear its own flags.

How long does it take to draft a patent application with it?

In the catheter matter on this page, the first draft was approved for inventor review on the second day after the disclosure arrived. Drafted the usual way, the firm estimates about eight working days.

Is it ethical to use AI for patent claim drafting?

The signing practitioner stays responsible for each claim and statement. Before approving, the attorney confirms that each claim was read, the agents’ citations checked, and no invention data left the firm’s workspace.

Does it keep the claim count under the fee thresholds?

The settings hold a claim budget for total and independent claims, with a warning before an excess fee. The filing check counts both and shows the fee as claims are added.

Three widths of a claim you already filed,
each one set against its closest art.

Pick an application your group has already filed, and compare its claim widths, support and filing counts with the draft the agents produce.