Comprehensive patent creation system with USPTO MPEP, prior art databases, and USPTO API for complete patent application analysis.
When to Use
Review patent applications for USPTO compliance, analyze claims/specifications/formalities, integrate prior art, get USPTO guidance, assist with patent drafting.
Quick Review Commands
/full-review # Complete parallel review
/review-claims # 35 USC 112b compliance
/review-specification # 35 USC 112a compliance
/review-formalities # MPEP 608 compliance
/create-patent # New patent application
Available MCP Tools
MPEP & Regulations
search_mpep- Search MPEP, 35 USC, 37 CFRget_mpep_section- Get complete MPEP section by number
Patent Search
search_patents_google- Full-text search worldwide, claims included (recommended)search_patents_bigquery- Fallback keyword search (~$2 a search)get_patent_bigquery- Get patent details (claims by default; abstract/description opt-in)get_patents_bigquery- Details for up to 50 patents in one query, same cost as onesearch_patents_by_cpc_bigquery- Search by CPC classification
Patent Analysis
review_patent_claims- Analyze claims for 35 USC 112(b)review_specification- Check specification support (112a)check_formalities- Verify MPEP 608 compliance
Diagram Generation
render_diagram- Create diagrams from DOT codecreate_flowchart- Generate patent-style flowchartscreate_block_diagram- Create system block diagramsadd_diagram_references- Add reference numbers
Review Workflows
Complete Patent Creation Review (/full-review)
Runs all analyzers in parallel for comprehensive analysis:
Output:
- All compliance issues across components
- Severity ratings (critical/important/minor)
- Specific MPEP citations
- Actionable fix recommendations
- Prioritized remediation plan
Claims-Only Review (/review-claims)
35 USC 112(b) Compliance:
- Antecedent basis
- Definiteness
- Claim structure
- Subjective terms
- Means-plus-function compliance
Specification Review (/review-specification)
35 USC 112(a) Requirements:
- Written description
- Enablement
- Best mode
- Claim support
Formalities Check (/review-formalities)
MPEP 608 Compliance:
- Abstract (50-150 words)
- Title (<=500 characters)
- Drawing references
- Required sections
Patent Creation Workflow (/create-patent)
Complete 6-phase patent drafting (55-80 minutes):
- Discovery (10-15 min) - Gather invention details
- Technology Analysis (5 min) - Assess patentability (101, 102, 103)
- Specification Drafting (15-20 min) - Background, summary, detailed description
- Claims Drafting (10-15 min) - Independent + dependent claims
- Diagrams & Abstract (10-15 min) - Block diagrams, flowcharts, abstract
- Automatic Validation (5-10 min) - Runs /full-review, provides fixes
Output: USPTO-ready filing package with diagrams
MPEP Research
# General search
search_mpep("claim definiteness 112(b)", top_k=5)
# Filtered by source
search_mpep("enablement", source_filter="35_USC")
search_mpep("abstract", source_filter="MPEP")
# Get specific section
get_mpep_section("2173") # Claim definiteness
Common MPEP Sections
| Section | Topic |
|---|---|
| 608 | Formalities (abstract, title, drawings) |
| 2100 | Patentability requirements |
| 2163 | Guidelines for 35 USC 112(a) |
| 2173 | Claim definiteness (35 USC 112(b)) |
Prior Art Integration
# Full-text search, worldwide, claims included
# (fallback: search_patents_bigquery with the same arguments)
search_patents_google(
query="neural network training",
country="US",
start_year=2020,
limit=20
)
# CPC classification search
search_patents_by_cpc_bigquery(cpc_code="G06N3", limit=50)
Integrate findings:
- Cite in Background section
- Emphasize distinctions in Summary
- Explain advantages in Detailed Description
- Draft claims to avoid/distinguish
- List in IDS
Best Practices
Before Review:
- Prepare complete application
- Run /full-review
- Address critical issues first
During Review:
- Focus on critical issues (antecedent basis, claim support, definiteness)
- Use MPEP citations
- Iterate until compliant
After Review:
- Document compliance
- Final /full-review validation
- Prepare filing package
Common Review Findings
Critical (Must Fix):
- Missing antecedent basis
- Claim elements unsupported
- Abstract exceeds 150 words
- Indefinite language
Important (Should Fix):
- Subjective terms without criteria
- Weak enablement
- Inconsistent terminology
Minor (Optional):
- Add example embodiments
- Strengthen best mode
- Improve claim scope
Quick Reference
Key Compliance Checks
| Requirement | Citation | Tool |
|---|---|---|
| Antecedent basis | 35 USC 112(b) | review_patent_claims |
| Written description | 35 USC 112(a) | review_specification |
| Enablement | 35 USC 112(a) | review_specification |
| Abstract length | MPEP 608.01(b) | check_formalities |
| Title format | MPEP 606 | check_formalities |