Global IP Matrix - Issue 4


We are delighted to present the fourth issue of The Global IP Matrix magazine to you, our loyal readers.

We have had an amazing year and grown immensely in popularity since our launch of the GIP Matrix at INTA in Seattle in 2018.

When we first launched the Global IP Matrix our main goal was to produce an IP publication like no other to educate and captivate our audience with raw, undiluted news reported to you by world-renowned IP professionals from all over the globe (who are experts at knowing how the land lies in the global IP world) and we have achieved this!

Over the last year, we have continued to work with leading IP law firms and service providers to ensure our publication has something for everyone with an involvement in this very interesting industry.

We hope that you really enjoy this issue and many more to come.
Thank you all, for helping us in exceeding our expectations.

From all of us at & The Global IP Matrix & Northon’s Media, PR & Marketing Ltd



Is it changing

patent prosecution?

Invention submission

AI has proven to be valuable to patent

committees during the invention submission

process. Patent committees typically receive

an invention submission and want to do

a high-level prior art analysis before even

evaluating the submission to determine if it is

worthy of patent protection. Committees want

an easy method to understand if the invention

is novel. With AI, they can take the text of

the invention disclosure and put it into the

system. They do not even need to know how

to structure a Boolean search because, within

moments, they will see highly predictive


Some feel that artificial intelligence

(AI) is revolutionizing the way

patents are prosecuted, while

others disagree. When we hear

this term used in relation to patent

prosecution, we immediately think

of prior art searching. However, AI is

being employed in several other ways.

As Susan Krelitz, adjunct professor

of Intellectual Asset Management at

the Mitchell Hamlin School of Law

said, “IP Law firms and departments

will use AI if it makes their life

easier, faster or less expensive. It is

that simple.” Let us discuss each of

the following areas, with specific

examples, where AI has proven to be

easier, faster or less expensive:

• Prior art searching

• Invention submission evaluation

•Watching the competition and

identifying new competitors

•Directing R&D with white space


•Opposition Invalidity Searching

Prior art searching

The most obvious use of AI within the

IP industry is prior art searching. AI and

machine learning are technologies that

allow us to easily and quickly gain insight

into massive amounts of patent data. The

traditional method of conducting a prior

art search is to have a researcher construct

a query into a patent database. The query

will identify published patents that meet the

specific criteria in the query. The criteria may

include class codes, keywords, exclusionary

words, etc.

The success of the prior art search is

dependent on the skill of the searchers. Did

they consider the right classes? Did they

select the right keywords? Did they exclude

keywords, without which the results will be

overly inclusive? Did they use the correct

Boolean operators? In other words, the search

inquiry will return exactly what the researcher

requested, nothing more and nothing less. The

result of a traditional search is usually a long

list of patents that the searcher must then sift

through and prioritize.

AI-based searching is different. It processes

human language with flexible semantics.

There is no need to learn Boolean search

structures. AI allows the user to input any

description of an invention directly into the

system, which then automatically extracts the

meaning of the text and identifies patents with

a similar purpose or technical content. The

system intelligently analyses the data and is

not dependent on the specific quires selected

by the searcher.

Take Octimine, for example. An innovative

start-up in the field of IP management

and recognized as one of the leading AI

platforms, Octimine takes semantic patent

search, analytics, and machine learning to

the next level. Founded in 2015 by former

Max-Planck-Institute and LMU Munich

researchers, the company was acquired by the

Dennemeyer Group in October 2018 and can

assist its users, through AI, in various aspects

of patent prosecution.

Octimine has a simple user interface but also

uses a hybrid approach for more flexibility.

The software solution allows a searcher to

input natural language text in any format and

refine the scope of the search by using specific

filters. One example of a filter is a date range.

Octimine users can restrict the search to prior

art that existed on or before a particular date.

Although the ease of entering a query is a

definite advantage of AI, many see the way

AI returns results as even more valuable.

Traditional search engines return a long

list of patents with little or no ranking and

no visualization. Octimine ranks results by

relevance and allows the searcher to quickly

see the most relevant prior art. Modern IP

search tools also use visualization to illustrate

search results and help users to get an

overview of the results in a split second.

Although AI has substantial advantages over

traditional search tools, it is not universally

accepted. There are several reasons given by

detractors for not using AI, the most common

being that Boolean searching is proven and

safe. Others complain that using AI involves a

“Black Box.” The searcher does not know how

the search was performed. Others complain

that they already know how to do Boolean

searching and they do not see the need for a

simplified method.

To help overcome these concerns, the

experts suggest using AI searching alongside

traditional methods. Many skeptical Octimine

users have been surprised that AI has identified

relevant prior art overlooked by conventional

methods. Because AI is so easy to use, running

an additional AI-based search to augment a

traditional search is not time-consuming nor

is it expensive.

Several large IP departments use Octimine to

do this type of first screening of the invention.

If prior art is identified that is directly on

point, they can decide to terminate the patent

process before investing a lot of time. If the

search identifies prior art, but the art is not

definitive, the committee can ask the inventor

to clarify any ambiguity. This can all be done

without a professional searcher and can,

depending on the results, save the committee

from investing unnecessary time in the


Watching, identifying

and comparing


AI is ideally suited both for comparing

a company’s portfolio to its competitors’

and for identifying unknown competitors.

There are traditional systems to monitor and

compare competitive portfolios, but those

systems require the company to identify the

competitors first.

AI allows a company to input a patent

portfolio into the system and then ask the

system to identify similar portfolios. If the

company is using Octimine, it will identify the

most similar portfolios, regardless of whether

the competitor is even known to the company.

Several analytics and visuals can be run to

compare similar portfolios.

Directing R&D

with white space


Several progressive companies are using AI

to identify white space where they should

direct their patent and R&D activities. AI

reveals the patent activity of a technology,

provides an overview of the state of the art

and offers valuable insights to commercial and

technology managers. As such, enough data

is available to inform the R&D department

as to where they should focus their activity

and where the IP department should focus its

filling strategy.

Octimine, by way of example, has several

graphical analytics to make it easier for the

company to see the white space.

Opposition /

invalidity search

When objecting to a competitor’s patent, the

first option is to file an opposition (at the

EPO), or a post-grant review (at the USPTO)

and try to prove that there was non-cited

prior art that invalidates the patent. AI is

ideally suited for finding similar patent art. If

using Octimine, all a user must do is insert

the patent number and set a filter for the

appropriate date. Octimine will identify prior

art that is on point.

Integration with IP

management systems

The most sophisticated AI systems offer APIs

that allow integration of the AI system to

their customers’ other systems. For example,

Octimine has an API that allows search

results to flow into other systems where they

can be associated with the relevant matter.

The Dennemeyer Group plans to integrate

Octimine into DIAMS IQ, Dennemeyer’s IP

management software system.

One example of where this integration is

valuable is in the invention submission and

review process. Once Octimine is integrated,

inventors and patent review committee

members can review the search results in the

same system they use to manage the invention

submission. They will be able to make an

AI-based novelty search a standard part of the

review process.

Other uses

This article is not an exhaustive list of the ways

AI is used by IP departments and firms today.

Other uses include identifying licensees,

patent valuation, patent proofreading, general

landscaping, and clustering.

The future of AIbased

IP systems

No one will question that AI is here to stay.

The most progressive firms and departments

are already using AI to make certain processes

easier, faster and less expensive. As systems

like Octimine become more pervasive, use

will increase and detractors will melt away.

About the

Dennemeyer Group

The Dennemeyer Group has more than 55

years of experience in delivering quality

Intellectual Property services including

patent annuities, trademark renewals,

recordals, strategic IP consulting and

intelligent software solutions for efficient

IP management. These services are

further expanded when coupled with

Dennemeyer & Associates, the group’s

law firm, to include EP validations, PCT

nationalizations, trademark, and patent

filing and prosecution.



More magazines by this user
Similar magazines