Patent

---
name: patent
description: >
  Patent research and IP landscape skill. Covers prior-art search
  strategy, claim mapping, landscape analysis, freedom-to-operate
  assessment, and patentability scoring. Use when conducting a prior-art
  search, mapping the IP landscape of a technology area, evaluating
  patentability of an invention, or running an FTO analysis before
  product launch.
license: MIT + Commons Clause
metadata:
  version: 1.0.0
  author: borghei
  category: research
  domain: research
  updated: 2026-05-27
  tags: [patent, ip, prior-art, freedom-to-operate, patentability, claims, landscape]
---

# Patent Research

A research-focused patent skill (not legal filing). Covers prior-art
search, IP landscape mapping, claim analysis, freedom-to-operate, and
patentability. For formal patent prosecution, work with a licensed
patent attorney.

## When to use this skill

- Conducting a **prior-art search** before filing a provisional patent
- Mapping the **IP landscape** in a technology area
- Evaluating the **patentability** of an invention
- Assessing **freedom-to-operate** before launching a product
- Tracking **competitive patent activity** in a market
- Preparing a **patent strategy** for a startup or R&D group

## Inputs the advisor expects

- Invention description (problem, solution, novelty)
- Technology area + relevant CPC/IPC classifications
- Target jurisdictions (US, EU, JP, CN — IP is jurisdictional)
- Existing prior art known (key references)
- Competitor list
- Timeline pressure (filing deadline, product launch)

## Workflows

### Workflow 1 — Plan a prior-art search

1. Define invention claims (key novel features).
2. Identify search classifications (CPC / IPC) + keywords.
3. Run `prior_art_search_planner.py` to produce a search plan.
4. Execute on USPTO / EPO / Espacenet / Google Patents / WIPO.

```bash
python3 patent/scripts/prior_art_search_planner.py \
  --input invention.json --format markdown
```

### Workflow 2 — Map the IP landscape

1. Capture identified patents (yours, competitors', adjacent).
2. Run `claim_landscape_mapper.py` to cluster by claim type, owner,
   technology subarea, recency; surface white space + crowded areas.

```bash
python3 patent/scripts/claim_landscape_mapper.py \
  --input patents.json --format markdown
```

### Workflow 3 — Score patentability of an invention

1. Capture invention + closest prior art.
2. Run `patentability_scorer.py` to rate novelty, non-obviousness,
   utility, subject matter eligibility.

```bash
python3 patent/scripts/patentability_scorer.py \
  --input patentability.json --format markdown
```

## Decision frameworks

### The three patentability criteria (US baseline)
1. **Novelty** (35 USC §102): not previously disclosed
2. **Non-obviousness** (35 USC §103): not obvious to person skilled in the art
3. **Utility** (35 USC §101): useful, with practical application

Plus:
- **Subject matter eligibility** (§101): not abstract idea, not law of nature
- **Enablement** (§112): described well enough to be made by skilled artisan
- **Definiteness** (§112): claims clearly distinguish

### Prior-art categories
- **Patents** (issued + published applications)
- **Non-patent literature** (papers, conference, dissertations, technical reports)
- **Commercial products** (sold publicly before filing)
- **Public disclosures** (talks, demos, blog posts — yes, including your own > 1 year prior)
- **Sales activity** (offers for sale, even pre-launch)

Inventors often miss non-patent prior art; this is where searches break.

### Freedom-to-operate (FTO)
Different from patentability. FTO asks: can I commercialize without
infringing someone else's patent?

- Patentability ≠ FTO (your patent could still infringe another)
- FTO is jurisdiction-specific
- Active patents only (not expired); typically 20 years from filing
- Patent attorney involvement essential for formal opinion

### IP strategy by stage
- **Pre-seed:** capture inventions; consider provisional filings; don't over-file
- **Seed/Series A:** strategic provisionals; key utility filings
- **Series B+:** PCT international; continuations to maintain pendency
- **Mature:** portfolio management; licensing; enforcement

## Common engagements

### "We have a new algorithm. Should we patent?"
1. Subject matter eligibility check (§101 — algorithms are tricky)
2. Prior art search (someone has probably published)
3. Strategic value (does patent enable / defend a business position?)
4. Cost-benefit ($5-25K provisional; $30-100K full prosecution)
5. Often answer: keep as trade secret, not patent

### "Run an FTO before our launch"
1. Identify candidate blocking patents (search + competitor review)
2. For each: review claims; assess infringement risk
3. Identify mitigations: design-around, license, abandon, challenge
4. Get formal opinion from patent counsel (insurance against willful infringement)

### "Map the patent landscape in our space"
1. Identify key players (companies + universities)
2. Search by classification + keyword
3. Cluster: by company, by sub-technology, by year
4. Surface white space (uncovered areas) + crowded zones
5. Strategy implications (where to play, where to design-around)

## Anti-patterns to avoid

- **Searching only keywords (no classification).** Misses translations + synonyms.
- **Searching only USPTO.** EPO + WIPO + JP have unique art.
- **Searching only patents.** Non-patent prior art is huge.
- **Public disclosure before filing.** Loses patentability outside US (1-year grace in US only).
- **Filing without prior-art search.** Reviewer finds it; patent invalid.
- **No FTO before product launch.** Surprise injunctions.
- **Patenting everything.** $30K per patent adds up; portfolio bloat distracts.
- **Filing without commercial strategy.** Patents are means, not ends.

## References

- `references/prior-art-search-strategy.md` — search databases, classifications, query patterns
- `references/claim-mapping-and-landscape.md` — claim analysis, landscape visualization
- `references/freedom-to-operate-and-patentability.md` — FTO process, patentability criteria

## Related skills

- `legal/contract-review` — IP licensing contracts
- `c-level-advisor/general-counsel-advisor` — strategic IP counsel
- `research/litreview` — non-patent literature search overlap