Is AutoPatent free to use?

Yes. AutoPatent offers free patent search and optimization trials. A Pro plan is available for advanced features.

Which patent databases does AutoPatent search?

For 11 major patent offices (US, EP, WO, JP, KR, CN, DE, GB, FR, CA, AU) AutoPatent searches official bibliographic records via the European Patent Office's Open Patent Services (OPS). For other offices it provides clearly labeled AI-assisted references recalled by the DeepSeek model, not a verified database search.

How does AI patent optimization work?

AutoPatent compares your invention description against the retrieved prior art — official bibliographic records where available, clearly labeled AI-recalled references otherwise — then rewrites your description to emphasize novel technical features, with itemized explanations for each change. It is a drafting aid, not legal advice.

Can AutoPatent guarantee my patent will be approved?

No tool can guarantee patent approval. AutoPatent helps you strengthen your application by identifying potential conflicts and suggesting improvements, but final approval depends on the patent office.

Is my patent idea kept confidential?

Yes. AutoPatent does not store your patent ideas permanently. All searches are processed in-memory and not shared with third parties.

How to Write Patent Claims That Withstand Examination

Writing patent claims that survive examination is one of the hardest skills in patent work. A well-drafted claim must be broad enough to provide meaningful protection but specific enough to pass the examiner's scrutiny. Here is a practical framework. Start with the independent claim. The independent claim defines the broadest scope of your protection. Every word in it is a limitation, so include only the elements that are strictly necessary for the invention to work. If you can remove a word and the invention still functions, that word does not belong in the independent claim. Fewer elements means broader protection. Use clear, consistent terminology. Pick one term for each element and use it throughout. Do not switch between "fastening member" and "attachment mechanism" for the same thing. Examiners interpret claim terms based on the specification, so define every important term explicitly in the description. Build dependent claims as fallback positions. Each dependent claim adds a specific limitation to the claim it depends on. If the independent claim is rejected, you can narrow to a dependent claim that the examiner can accept. Think of dependent claims as a layered defense: each layer covers a different variation of the invention. Avoid means-plus-function language unless you intend it. In the US, using "means for" triggers a narrow construction tied to the specific embodiment in the specification. If you want broader coverage, use structural language instead. Anticipate design-arounds. Before finalizing your claims, ask yourself: if I were a competitor trying to avoid this claim, what would I change? Then add dependent claims that cover those alternatives. The goal is to make it difficult to design around without sacrificing functionality. Support every claim in the specification. Each claim must have basis in the description. If the specification only describes one way to implement a feature, the claim covering that feature may be too narrow or, worse, unsupported. Include multiple embodiments and alternative language for every important element. Finally, read the claims out loud before filing. If a sentence is hard to parse, the examiner will struggle with it too. Clear claims get through examination faster and with fewer restrictions. These principles apply across jurisdictions. Whether you are filing at the USPTO, EPO, or CNIPA, a well-structured claim with clear language and solid specification support has the best chance of withstanding examination.