Patentability / Novelty Search: what the service is for
Our Patentability / Novelty Search examines patent disclosures, granted patents, published applications, and non-patent literature across relevant jurisdictions to evaluate the novelty and non-obviousness of your inventive concept before drafting and filing. The practical purpose of this service is to identify relevant prior art before a filing or claim-drafting decision. Patent research and technical analysis should be scoped around the claim, technology, dates, and jurisdictions that matter to the matter.
When this service is useful
The service can be used before a filing, during prosecution, as part of a product or brand decision, during a transaction, or when a dispute requires a well-organized technical record. The right depth depends on the question being asked. A focused assignment is generally more useful than a broad request that does not identify the decision, jurisdiction, date range, or evidence that matters.
Scope and review approach
The work starts by defining the subject matter and the boundaries of the assignment. For research matters, this normally includes relevant dates, jurisdictions, entities, technical terminology, classification concepts, and known references. For operational matters, it includes the matter record, source correspondence, procedural event, deadline rule, and required output. Findings are separated from assumptions so that the final material can be reviewed by counsel or the responsible business team.
What is examined
Multi-Lingual Global Databases
Searching across USPTO, EPO, WIPO, CNIPA, JPO, KIPO, and multiple relevant jurisdictions including native Asian and European language sources.
Non-Patent Literature Inquest
Deep indexing of IEEE, ScienceDirect, PubMed, arXiv, technical whitepapers, and dissertations to uncover non-patent disclosures.
Classification & Citation Weaving
Rigorous mapping through CPC, IPC, US, and FI/F-term classifications paired with forward and backward citation network tracking.
Technical Feature Mapping
Every inventive element mapped side-by-side against the closest references with color-coded novelty indicators.
How the work is structured
01. Technical Extraction & Claim Scoping. We dissect the invention disclosure, extract novel core features, and define the technical problem-solution framework.
02. Multi-Pronged Search Construction. Building semantic queries, Boolean operators, CPC/IPC classification trees, and citation clusters across enterprise databases.
03. Deep Screening & Relevance Grading. Hundreds of hits analyzed by domain engineers; candidates categorized into Category X (novelty-destroying), Y (obviousness), and A (background).
04. Deliverable Engineering & Debrief. Comprehensive report structured with executive summary, detailed claim mappings, and strategic filing recommendations.
Typical deliverables
- Executive Novelty Assessment & Risk Scoring
- Feature-by-Feature Prior Art Comparison Matrix
- Direct Patent & NPL PDF Reference Package
- Claim Strategy & Broadening Recommendations
- Class, Assignee & Keyword Search History Record
Where it is commonly used
Pre-Filing Stage — Inventors & Startups. Save unnecessary filing costs by confirming novelty before drafting full applications.
R&D Direction — Corporate R&D Labs. Identify closest existing solutions to guide engineering around crowded spaces.
Patent Drafting Focus — Patent Attorneys. Draft narrower, prosecution-focused claims tailored to circumvent known references.
Useful starting material may include the invention disclosure, claims, product specifications, prosecution history, trademark specimen, portfolio export, official correspondence, target jurisdictions, priority dates, known references, or a specific list of questions. If some information is missing, the scope should identify that limitation instead of filling gaps with assumptions.
Important review point
Research and operational support are decision-support services. They do not replace legal advice, a patentability or validity opinion, an infringement opinion, a trademark clearance opinion, or an official determination by a government office. Patent and trademark rights can depend on claim construction, evidence, procedural history, local law, and facts that may change over time. The final work should therefore be reviewed by the attorney or other qualified professional responsible for the matter.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a Patentability Search and an FTO Search?
A Patentability Search looks across relevant jurisdictions at all prior publications (patents, expired patents, articles) to verify if an invention is new. An FTO (Freedom to Operate) Search focuses strictly on active, unexpired patents in specific target jurisdictions where you plan to manufacture or sell, evaluating infringement risk.
We utilize Orbit Intelligence, Derwent Innovation, PatBase, Google Patents, Espacenet, IEEE Xplore, PubMed, and specialized chemical/biotech repositories.
What turnaround times are available?
Standard turnaround is 4-5 business days. Expedited rush delivery (an agreed project timeline) is available upon request for urgent filing deadlines.
