Overview
Conducting a patent search before filing a patent application is recommended.
Conducting a patent search will allow tailoring of a subsequent patent application in view of the documents raised by the search. The documents raised by the search are likely to be cited during examination of the patent application.
Search Limitations
The search strategy of a patent search may involve keywords, alternate expressions and patent classes. Given various possible patent search strategies, no patent search can be considered fully conclusive.
Additionally, patents are generally not published until 18 months after filing. For this reason, a patent search will not cover applications filed at least 18 months prior to the search.
A literature search is sometimes conducted as part of a patent search. Searching of literature databases is limited to the literature search strategy.
Cursory Searches
If a cursory patent search is performed, at least the US database and European database (Espacenet) should be searched using the links provided below. The Internet should also be searched to determine whether similar products already exist in the market.
In addition to Espacenet, the European Patent Register has advanced searching capabilities.
For example, it is possible to search by grant date.
Search: (grd=2016 grd=2017 or grd=2018) and ((pa=facebook or pa=ebay) or ti=social)
It is also possible to search the Australian Patent Office database (AUSPAT) for say recently granted software patents. Search terms could include ‘computer’ and ‘responsive’. The wildcard ‘*’ can be used as a truncation operator when limiting by IPC class.
Google and Espacenet offer similar functionality. For example:
AUSPAT can be used to obtain file wrappers.
Cost
A professional search firm in Australia may charge between A$3,500-$6,000++ or more for a standard comprehensive search (no literature searching). We charge approximately $500 for preparing a search statement and instructing a professional search firm. A cursory search may cost about $1,500.
If you would like us to assist in reviewing the search results, further charges will apply.
A number of Australian search firms are detailed below.
Patent Classification Searching
It is possible to do some ‘class based‘ searching of publicly accessible databases such as Espacenet.
University library websites such as the University of Bath website often provide an excellent basic guide to patent searching. A number of videos on searching using various classification systems are provided below.
The field, structure, function and use of the invention each provide relevant keywords. A structural thesaurus and a functional thesaurus (indexes) are generally compiled as part of a search (together with classes). Indexes are important given the possibility of alternative keywords. For example, consider ‘electronic cigarette’ versus ‘simulated cigarette’ versus ‘inhaler’. A patent searcher will generally apply several searching techniques (See for example https://www.acclaimip.com/how-to-do-a-patent-keyword-search/).
CPC classification of a European patent is shown below.
Classification
A24F7/00 Mouthpieces for pipes; Mouthpieces for cigar or cigarette holders
A24F40/485 Valves; Apertures
…
A61M15/06 Inhaling appliances shaped like cigars, cigarettes or pipes
H01C17/00 Apparatus or processes specially adapted for manufacturing resistors
H05B1/0244 Heating of fluids
H05B3/0014 Devices wherein the heating current flows through particular resistances
H05B3/10 Heater elements characterised by the composition or nature of the materials or by the arrangement of the conductor
…
A24F40/10 Devices using liquid inhalable precursors
A24F40/40 Constructional details, e.g. connection of cartridges and battery parts
A24F40/44 Wicks
A61M11/001 Particle size control
A61M11/04 Sprayers or atomisers specially adapted for therapeutic purposes operated by the vapour pressure of the liquid to be sprayed or atomised
…
CPC Classification
The European Patent Office (EPO) and US Patent Office (USPTO) now both use the CPC classification system. CPC classes provide a further particularisation of IPC classes. It is possible to do a conversion from CPC to IPC. For example CPC class ‘G06F 16/3343 {using phonetics} (four dots) ‘ is a further particularisation of IPC class ‘G06F 16/33 Querying (two dots) ‘ as detailed on https://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/cpc/html/conG06Ftoipc.html#G06F16/3349.
The EPO provides a number of learning resources online including https://e-courses.epo.org/course/index.php. General search strategy is also covered.
Where to start
There are a number options as to where to start.
One option is to start with the Catchword Index or IPCCAT. In this regard: ‘With the new cross lingual IPCCAT-neural, system for automatic text categorization in the IPC, it is possible to perform automatic classification in the IPC at subgroup level through submission of text which can now be either in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian or Spanish, and get an accuracy of the predictions similar to the one in English, i.e. 84% for top-three IPC guesses among 73,633 symbols.‘ (WIPO)
A search for ‘electronic cigarette’ using IPCCAT provides a good example. IPCCAT returns: ‘A24F 47/00; A61M 15/06; A61M 11/04‘ as a prediction.
Usually, however, it is still necessary to directly search class headings online. Keyword searching to locate relevant patents and associated inventors to determine further classes is also advisable.
The EPO provides a classification search guide.
A search of the CPC classification system using Espacenet yields the following results.
Various class mappers are listed on the EPO website. The USPTO database supports searches using the US Patent Classification (USPC) for US patents from 1790 to the end of 2014. The US classification then switched to CPC classification. The USPTO provides: (i) Classification search; and (ii) USPC and CPC tools.
Tools such as DTSearch and other indexers can be used on CPC pdf/xml documents for overview purposes.
A number of educational videos are provided below. Clients should at the very least conduct a cursory search before proceeding with a patent application. Engaging a search firm to conduct a comprehensive search is recommended. As noted above, no search can be considered as being conclusive.
Commercial Databases
The International Patent Office has provided a guide to various databases.
The report is dated 2008 and notes that ‘the landscape of patent and non-patent databases is constantly changing, with new services coming onto the market and existing services being expanded, merged or discontinued‘.
Considerations may involve cost, coverage, custom datasets, classification features, landscaping, alerts and a number of other factors.
The World Intellectual Property Office has provided an online search tool, that outlines the features of several databases.
provides an online forum and several resources relating to patent searching. For example, a list of vendors is provided. Questions regarding cost and coverage are sometimes made in the forum. Issues such as graphic user interface responsiveness may also be important for searchers conducting searches continually throughout the day.
The Derwent publication ‘Utilizing patent classifications for more precise and accurate searching’ provides an overview of various patent classification systems.
One commercial system to investigate might be Minesoft Patbase (with API). Video tutorials are available online.
The different datasets and features of different databases meet different needs.
Proximity Searching
Various sources are available on boolean and proximity expressions. For example, Google patent search FAQ notes the following (search link).
(safety ADJ/5 belt) NEAR/10 (baby OR child) SAME vehicle.
The Patseer publication ‘Guide to Practical Patent Searching and how to use PatSeer for Patent Search and Analysis‘ provides some further information on patent searching (search link).
(air* AND vehicle) AND (((frontal* OR (Side NEAR/5 impact) OR external*)) NEAR/5 airbag*)
The patent search/analytics website GreyB provides the following example (search link).
(CL= (((((switch* OR nonlinear OR (non linear) OR PWM) NEAR/6 supply) NEAR/10 (parallel)) NEAR/12 (linear OR analog)) AND (convertor OR converter))) OR (TI= (((((switch* OR nonlinear OR (non linear) OR PWM) NEAR/6 supply) NEAR/10 (parallel)) NEAR/12 (linear OR analog)) AND (convertor OR converter))) OR (AB= (((((switch* OR nonlinear OR (non linear) OR PWM) NEAR/6 supply) NEAR/10 (parallel)) NEAR/12 (linear OR analog)) AND (convertor OR converter)))
Both Google and Espacenet provide for proximity searching. The publication How to search the indescribable – Search concepts for products requiring parametric and/or product-by-process definitions provides the following Espacenet example (link).
(diffuse* OR light) prox/distance<5 reflect*) AND
(wettability OR contact angle*) AND
((skin OR dense) prox/distance<2 (surface OR layer) OR (asym-metric membrane))
The publication ‘Patent search for anti coronavirus related technologies (Part 1 vaccine)‘ provides further Espacenet search expression examples.
Truncation symbols (*, ?, #) would also generally be used as part of a search.
Many search phrases involving expressions, operators and classes would be used by a search firm when performing a comprehensive search.
Additional Searching
Further considerations include: (i) conventional keyword and classed based searching by different search firms; and (ii) supplementary semantic searching; (iii) supplementary AI searching; (iv) extended non-literature searching.
Ambercite AI searching claims to improve search quality by 25% ‘when used to complement existing search processes‘ (See ambercite.com).
The Ambercite website provides the following comparison table:
Method
Boolean (Conventional)
Semantic
Citation searching
Principle
Returns a set of patents that meet a particular query, which often includes a combination of keyword and class code terms.
Searches for patents that have similar keywords or blocks of text
Searches for patents that are similar to one or more starting patents.
Strengths
Widely used and accepted.
Can be used for new inventions.
Many existing vendors.
Can start with a description of the invention or a representative claim
Results are ranked
Excellent ability to return similar results.
Results are ranked, and can include relevant patents that have not been previously cited.
Weaknesses
Creating queries can be an artform.
Will often return many results that are not relevant, i.e. ‘false positives’.
Users can be caught out if relevant patents do not include the expected keywords or class codes.
Results may not be ranked in order of relevance.
Can return false positive results, despite having similar results.
Need a starting patent, which may not apply for new inventions.
May not pick up relevant patents where citation data is lacking.
Examples
Free: Google Patent, Patent Lens and Espacenet, plus national patent office sites, for example USPTO, IP Australia, and others.
Subscription: Patseer, Derwent Innovation, Patbase, Patsnap.
Innography, IP Rally, Innovation-Q, IP-Screener, Tekmine, Octimine, Incopat.
Ambercite
Source: Ambercite.com
Statistics
Online services can provide statistics for different jurisdictions on an examiner and attorney firm level.
As a generic search we analysed the number of examination reports issued for granted patents in IPC class G06 from August 20 to August 21 limited to the words ‘computer’ and ‘responsive‘. This was done for a number of reasons including comparing various response styles. As part of our analysis we found that the number of granted patents was 236. Our results as percentages were follows:
In Australia, the time period for acceptance is 12 months. This is one reason why the maximum number of reports was four (4).
We did not determine whether the only objection raised concerned a postponement of acceptance (although being feasible).
If you believe that these estimates are incorrect, please let us know.
Other
There are a number of considerations with respect to patent searching. Generally, with an international application filed in Australia a search will be conducted by the Australian Patent Office.
Some commentators have noted that with an International Application, it is possible for Australian residents to request searching by the South Korean Patent Office. One reason for doing so is that more foreign citations will often be raised. A number of considerations apply.
Patent Searching Links
Espacenet: Espacenet Database Service
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/
Espacenet is a website developed by the European Patent Office. The aim of Espacenet is to provide the public with free access to worldwide patent information. The website allows searching of European and other patent documents. Full text searching extends only to the titles and abstracts of the patent documents. Patent documents can be downloaded automatically in PDF format.
Google: Google Patents
Google Patents provides another method of searching the US patents database. Search results can be shown as thumbnails of patent document images. US patent documents can be downloaded automatically in PDF format.
PatentScope: WIPO PatentScope Service
The PatentScope database allows full text searching of published international patent applications filed through WIPO. International patent applications are later divided into national phase applications. Notably, there is no such thing as an international patent.
USPTO: Patent Full Text Searching (PAFT)
The US patent database allows full text searching of granted patents and published applications. Full text searching is limited to patents granted after 1976.
WIPO: World Intellectual Property Office
The World Intellectual Property Office website provides information on the PCT patent application procedure. The website allows full text searching of published patent applications. Limited national phase information is available.
European Patent Register
https://register.epo.org/regviewer
The European Patent Register provides procedural and legal status data on patent applications handled by the European Patent Office.
Australian Search Firms
R.E. Kemp & Co. Pty. Limited: Search Provider
http://www.kemp.com.au/patser.html
A patent search firm based in Australia..
Intellectual Technology Services: Search Provider
http://www.patent-searcher.com
A patent search firm based in Australia.
Sagacious Research: Search Provider
https://sagaciousresearch.com/
A patent search firm based in India.
Downloading Software
Patzilla: Software
https://github.com/ip-tools/patzilla
Patzilla provides a self-hosted interface for searching a number of databases including the EPO. Patent downloading is also provided.
Google Patents
https://patents.google.com
Google provides online patent searching and downloading.
*As with all information provided by this website, the content of this webpage is subject to our disclaimer. The material provided is not to be relied upon under any circumstances.