Filing-readiness example
Public patentability gap audit
Decide whether a disclosure has differentiators worth counsel review before drafting.
Review output
The report shows likely differentiators, closest references, gaps, and attorney-review questions.
Start with use the public record or public non-confidential summary and the review question.. The report shows the working assumptions, cited evidence, and approvals before credits are used or exports are created.
- Search scope
- Visible in the report before the work is relied on or exported.
- Closest references
- Visible in the report before the work is relied on or exported.
- Possible differentiators
- Visible in the report before the work is relied on or exported.
- Counsel questions
- Visible in the report before the work is relied on or exported.
Exports and saved work
Export the work you need to share.
Patent practitioners live in reports, tables, emails, and matter folders. Online search has to produce work they can inspect, share with counsel, save, and resume.
PDF review report
Export after review and approval; the action is recorded.
Memo-ready summary
Export after review and approval; the action is recorded.
CSV evidence table
Export after review and approval; the action is recorded.
Trust and limits
Clear enough to use, bounded enough to trust.
You see the safeguards and limits before relying on the report. Legal conclusions, restricted data, and enterprise rollout stay outside self-serve.
- No confidential facts before account
- Cited source snippets stay inspectable
- No legal conclusion
- No filing recommendation
- No private file-history review
- No final claim scope opinion
Next step
Use the same search type on your matter.
Sign in, accept the terms, confirm you are authorized to use the information, review the price, approve credit use, then search and export the report.