Skip to content

Invalidity & validity research

Find the technical evidence behind the claims.

Validity-oriented prior-art research for patents in software, AI/ML, data processing, distributed systems and cloud infrastructure. We locate relevant disclosures, map them to the claim elements in question, and document every source so your team can verify it.

FROM $3,120 · 10 BUSINESS DAYS · FIXED FEE · DETAILS

Asserted claims rarely come with an easy answer.

Software and systems patents are often drafted in functional language that maps onto many implementations. The relevant prior art is scattered across patent literature, academic papers, standards documents, product manuals and archived software releases — frequently described in different vocabulary than the claims use.

Finding it is only half the work. Counsel needs to know exactly where in each reference a limitation is disclosed, how confident that reading is, and whether the document predates the relevant date. That takes technical judgement and careful documentation, not a list of search hits.

What the research covers

01

Claim analysis

We break the claims under investigation into individual limitations and identify the terms and technical concepts that will drive the search.

02

Date framing

We record the priority, filing and publication dates of the subject patent and agree the cut-off date that references must predate.

03

Patent literature

Searches across patent publications using classification, keyword, citation and family-based strategies.

04

Non-patent literature

Academic papers, conference proceedings, technical standards, documentation and archived web material, where publicly accessible and in scope.

05

Evidence mapping

Promising references are read in full and the passages, figures and columns relevant to each claim element are located and cited.

06

Gaps and uncertainty

Elements with weak or no support are reported as such, together with what was searched and where further work could focus.

Workflow

How an engagement runs.

  1. 01

    Scope the claims

    Agree the claims, elements and any claim constructions to investigate, plus the relevant date.

  2. 02

    Build the search strategy

    Expand terminology and synonyms, identify classifications and seed references.

  3. 03

    Search and screen

    Run patent and non-patent searches and screen candidates for technical relevance and date.

  4. 04

    Analyse references

    Read the strongest candidates closely and locate passages relevant to each element.

  5. 05

    Map the evidence

    Build an element-by-element matrix with pinpoint citations and observations.

  6. 06

    Report

    Deliver findings, the evidence matrix, search record and stated limitations.

Deliverables

What you receive.

The exact deliverables are agreed in the quotation. A typical report includes:

Executive research summary
The strongest references found, how they relate to the claims, and the main gaps — on one or two pages.
Prior-art reference register
Each reference with identifier, title, relevant dates, source link and a short technical summary.
Element-by-element evidence matrix
Each claim limitation mapped to cited passages, figures or columns, with technical observations.
Publication-date evidence
Where a reference’s public availability matters, the dates and supporting sources we found.
Search record
Databases, queries, classifications and screening criteria used, so the search can be assessed and extended.
Limitations and open questions
What was out of scope, which elements remain weakly supported, and suggested next steps.
ELEMENT-BY-ELEMENT EVIDENCE MATRIXLAYOUT
Layout of the evidence matrix. Each claim element is paired with pinpoint citations into the reference and a technical observation. Content shown schematically.

Verifiable by your team

Every mapped element points to a specific location in a specific document, so findings can be checked quickly.

Ready to build on

The matrix and register are structured for counsel and experts to extend into their own work product.

Honest about gaps

Weak elements are flagged rather than stretched, which saves time later in the matter.

Our work is technical research. Whether a reference qualifies as prior art, and whether a claim is invalid, are legal determinations for qualified counsel.

Price & delivery

From $3,120, delivered in 10 business days.

A fixed fee for an agreed scope, confirmed in writing before any work starts. No hourly billing. Larger scopes are quoted as a fixed add-on, and the quote is free with no obligation.

What can change the fee

  • Number of claims and elements under investigation
  • Technical complexity of the subject matter
  • Breadth of patent and non-patent literature search
  • Depth of evidence mapping required
  • Jurisdictions and languages in scope
  • Deadline

Rush delivery in half the standard time: +50%. 50% on acceptance of the quote, 50% on delivery. Invoiced via Stripe (card or bank transfer). All pricing

MOST REQUESTED

FLAGSHIP

Invalidity & Validity Research

from$3,120

Delivered in 10 business days

  • 1 independent claim (up to 12 elements)
  • Patent and non-patent literature search
  • Evidence matrix for the top 5 references
  • Reference register, search record and limitations

Each additional independent claim: +$960

Questions

About this service.

Which technologies do you cover?

Software and computing broadly: AI and machine learning, data processing and databases, distributed systems, networking, cloud infrastructure, security and related areas. If a matter falls outside that, we will tell you during scoping.

Do you search non-patent literature?

Yes, where it is publicly accessible: academic papers and proceedings, technical standards, documentation, and archived web and software material. The specific sources searched are recorded in the report.

Can you work to our claim constructions?

Yes. If you provide constructions, or alternative readings to test, we map evidence against them and state which reading each observation relies on.

Will you tell us a claim is invalid?

No. We report the technical evidence and how it relates to each element. Legal conclusions remain with you.

Can the work be split into phases?

Yes. A common pattern is a scoped initial search followed by deeper mapping on the most promising references, each quoted separately.

Tell us what you’re investigating.

Describe your research objective and we’ll come back with a proposed scope, deliverables and a fixed-fee quotation.

Request a Research Quote