The optimal claim — surfaced, not guessed.
We propose the strongest claim wording your disclosure supports, ranked against narrower fallbacks. You see the trade-offs and the specific prior art each option survives. Choose with confidence; file with conviction.
A short list of options, each scored — not a guess.
The strongest claim wording your disclosure supports
We surface the broadest claim language defensible from your disclosure — and rank it against narrower alternatives so you choose with eyes open.
Multiple options, each scored
You see a short ladder of claim wordings — broadest, broad-but-defensible, conservative — each with the specific risks and the specific patents that drove the score.
Pre-empt the predictable rejections
Each candidate is stress-tested against the rejection paths examiners actually run. The wordings that survive are the ones we surface.
Multi-jurisdiction by default
The same disclosure produces the right wording for INPI, USPTO and EPO formats — the format differences are absorbed by the platform, not by your draft.
The right breadth, every time.
The classic mistake in patent drafting is reaching too broad (the claim is invalidated) or too narrow (the claim is granted but designed-around). The platform surfaces the breadth that threads the needle — the broadest wording your disclosure supports without crossing the line into prior art.
You still pick the wording. We just put the right options in front of you, with the right evidence under each one.
- The candidate claim wording, line-by-line
- The specific prior art each candidate clears
- The specific risk element that drove the score down
- A suggested narrowing path if the broad option is rejected