Novelty search
Establishes whether the invention has already been disclosed, ahead of drafting and filing.
Search / before drafting
Know what already exists before you draft.
A prior art search establishes the landscape the application will have to survive. For work coming out of a research group, that landscape usually includes the group’s own publications.
Coverage / 01
Patent databases are only half of it.
For research-derived inventions, the citation that causes the problem is frequently not a patent. It is a paper, a thesis or a conference proceeding — often in an adjacent field.
- Indian and international patent databases, including published applications
- Scientific and technical literature, including conference proceedings
- Theses, dissertations and institutional repositories
- Standards documents, technical disclosures and product literature
- Your own earlier publications and filings
Types of search / 02
Different questions need different searches.
Naming the question first avoids paying for a search that answers something else.
Freedom to operate
Considers whether making or selling a product might fall within rights held by others. A different question from novelty.
Invalidity search
Looks for material that could be used against an existing granted patent.
Landscape search
Maps activity in a technical field, typically to inform research direction or strategy.
Method / 03
Search terms follow the technical concept.
A search built only on the words in your abstract will miss disclosures that describe the same idea in different vocabulary. The concept is broken down first, then searched.
- Identify the technical problem and the essential elements
- Build synonym and terminology sets, including older and field-specific usage
- Search by classification as well as keyword
- Follow citations forward and backward from the closest results
- Record what was searched, where and when
The search record matters as much as the results. It establishes what was covered, which is what allows a later assessment to state its own limits honestly.
Limits / 04
No search is exhaustive.
Any provider who tells you otherwise is selling certainty that does not exist.
- Applications are not published for eighteen months from priority, so a recent filing may be invisible
- Database coverage varies by jurisdiction, language and period
- Non-patent literature is indexed inconsistently
- A search reduces risk; it does not remove it
Questions
Asked most often.
It depends on the technical field, how well-defined the invention is and how much adjacent literature exists. Timing is confirmed once the disclosure has been reviewed, rather than quoted before the subject matter is understood.
Yes, and it matters. Self-disclosure is one of the most common reasons an academic application runs into difficulty, and it is entirely avoidable if identified before filing rather than during examination.
That is a useful result, not a failed search. Close prior art usually reshapes the claims rather than ending the matter, and knowing about it before drafting produces a stronger application than discovering it at examination.
You can, and a preliminary look is worthwhile. Share what you found and we will build on it rather than repeat it, which usually reduces the scope of work required.
Related work
Other stages of the same route.
Next step