Patent Invalidity/Validity Search

Patent invalidity (or validity) search is conducted to recognize patent and non-patent documents which may challenge the novelty and inventiveness of a specific patent claim. This helps render other similar patent applications to be filed and help establish integrity of a patent portfolio which may be useful for licensing or commercialization .

Patent Invalidity/validity search requires extensive research of prior arts to establish any challenges or question the novelty or the non-obviousness of a patent. The search reports contain the details of the potential patent and non-patent literature and mapping of competitor’s claims.

For invalidity/validity search, our experts make sure that any prior litigation and post-grant associated claim construction, as well as the prosecution historical cases, are evaluated to ensure that those claim elements are searched in the relevant interpretation and scope.

While performing invalidity/validity search, we focus on:

  • Making an accurate understanding of the technology of the patent and claims.
  • Accurately defining the novel aspects of the patent based on the speculation and file history.
  • Validating the prior art as per the respective regional law.

How InventionIP can support you for Invalidity Search?

InventionIP can assist you in making the right decision for your project with our exhaustive reports of your project.

Professional
experts

Our experts discuss the patent application and your requirements and set the expectations for the outcome of the project. We also ensure the confidentiality of your project.

Review, analysis and quotation

We review your patent number documents and accordingly share with you the best discounted fee.

Instruction received and work begins

Post sharing the fee quotations, instructions are awaited to begin your search. Once search is completed, the reports are shared with you in your requested format.

What is the difference between Invalidity or Validity Search?

The validity search is done by appointee after the grant of a patent to make sure that the patent granted is valid and protectable whereas an invalidity search is conducted by a defendant to invalidate a patent by conducting prior art search.

 Why InventionIP for Invalidity/validity search?

  • We provide end-to-end patent related searches in all domains.
  • With our patent services, we help save additional resources, time and money spent on applications that may not be eligible for patent.
  • Our experts are professionally trained to deliver results with great precision and accuracy.
  • We know our clients’ needs and work continuously to ensure that their needs are met.
  • We make sure to protect the privacy of our client’s patent information through all means.

Invalidity/Validity Search FAQ's

  • What is the difference between invalidity and validity search?

    The validity search is done by an appointee after the grant of a patent to make sure that the patent granted is valid and protectable whereas an invalidity search is conducted by a defendant to invalidate a patent by conducting any sort of prior art search in the region.

  • How do you do an Invalidation Search?

    Our experts make sure that any prior litigation and post-grant associated claim construction, as well as the prosecution historical cases, are evaluated to ensure that those claim elements are searched in the relevant interpretation and scope.

    While performing invalidity/validity search, we focus on:

    • Making an accurate understanding of the technology of the patent and claims.
    • Accurately defining the novel aspects of the patent based on the speculation and file history.
    • Validating the prior art as per the respective regional law.
  • What is an independent claim?

    An Independent claim is a single, stand alone claim that contains all the limitations necessary to define an invention. It does not depend upon any previous claim to support the argument presented in itself.

  • What is a dependent claim?

    A dependent claim is a claim that refers to previous claims provided and hence is limited in it’s argument.