patent-review

An examiner-style patent review simulates a patent examiner's critique to uncover likely office-action rejections by assessing novelty, non-obviousness, clarity, written description, and enablement across USPTO, CNIPA, or EPO standards. It identifies rejection grounds before filing.

To check patent claims for obviousness and novelty, submit your claims, specification sections, and prior art for multi-round reasoning analysis. This process generates rejection grounds and amendment recommendations to refine your patent application drafts.

Yes, this patent review process supports USPTO, CNIPA, and EPO standards. It evaluates jurisdiction-aware criteria including claim clarity, written description support, and enablement to produce rejection grounds tailored to your specified patent office requirements.

You need to provide patent claims, specification sections, prior art, invention disclosure structure, and figure numeral mappings. These inputs enable the system to trace support issues and evaluate clarity, written description, and enablement requirements accurately.

Patent application weaknesses are reported in a PATENT_REVIEW.md file summarizing identified issues, severity levels, citations, and fixes. This traceable improvement report details rejection grounds and specific amendment recommendations for your claims and specification.

The best way to fix patent claim drafting issues is to apply the recommended amendments and then run a follow-up multi-round refinement review. This addresses critical and major issues iteratively to ensure your revised claims overcome the simulated rejection grounds.