Patent Claims Analyzer Skill
Automated analysis of patent claims for USPTO compliance with 35 USC 112(b) requirements.
When to Use
Invoke this skill when users ask to:
- Review patent claims for definiteness
- Check antecedent basis in claims
- Analyze claim structure
- Find claim drafting issues
- Validate claims before filing
- Fix USPTO office action issues related to claims
What This Skill Does
Performs comprehensive automated analysis:
- Antecedent Basis Checking:
- Finds terms used without prior introduction - Detects missing "a/an" before first use - Identifies improper "said/the" before first use - Tracks term references across claims
- Definiteness Analysis (35 USC 112(b)):
- Identifies subjective/indefinite terms - Detects relative terms without reference - Finds ambiguous claim language - Checks for clear claim boundaries
- Claim Structure Validation:
- Parses independent vs. dependent claims - Validates claim dependencies - Checks claim numbering - Identifies claim type (method, system, etc.)
- Issue Categorization:
- Critical: Must fix before filing - Important: May cause rejection - Minor: Best practice improvements
Required Data
This skill uses the automated claims analyzer from: Location: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/python\claims_analyzer.py
How to Use
When this skill is invoked:
- Load the claims analyzer:
import sys sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.environ.get('CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT', '.'), 'python')) from python.claims_analyzer import ClaimsAnalyzer analyzer = ClaimsAnalyzer() - Analyze claims:
claims_text = """ 1. A system comprising: a processor; a memory; and said processor configured to... """ results = analyzer.analyze_claims(claims_text) - Present analysis:
- Show compliance score (0-100) - List issues by severity (critical, important, minor) - Provide MPEP citations for each issue - Suggest specific fixes
Analysis Output Structure
{
"claim_count": 20,
"independent_count": 3,
"dependent_count": 17,
"compliance_score": 85, # 0-100
"total_issues": 12,
"critical_issues": 2,
"important_issues": 7,
"minor_issues": 3,
"issues": [
{
"category": "antecedent_basis",
"severity": "critical",
"claim_number": 1,
"term": "said processor",
"description": "Term 'processor' used with 'said' before first introduction",
"mpep_cite": "MPEP 2173.05(e)",
"suggestion": "Change 'said processor' to 'the processor' or introduce with 'a processor' first"
},
# ... more issues
]
}Common Issues Detected
- Antecedent Basis Errors:
- Using "said/the" before "a/an" introduction - Terms appearing in dependent claims not in parent - Missing antecedent in claim body
- Definiteness Issues:
- Subjective terms: "substantially", "about", "approximately" - Relative terms: "large", "small", "thin" - Ambiguous language: "and/or", "optionally"
- Structure Issues:
- Means-plus-function without adequate structure - Improper claim dependencies - Missing preamble or transition
Presentation Format
Present analysis as:
CLAIMS ANALYSIS REPORT
======================
Summary:
- Total Claims: 20 (3 independent, 17 dependent)
- Compliance Score: 85/100
- Issues Found: 12 (2 critical, 7 important, 3 minor)
CRITICAL ISSUES (Must Fix):
[Claim 1] Antecedent Basis Error
Issue: Term 'processor' used with 'said' before introduction
Location: "said processor configured to..."
MPEP: 2173.05(e)
Fix: Change to 'the processor' or introduce with 'a processor' first
[Claim 5] Indefinite Term
Issue: Subjective term 'substantially' without definition
Location: "substantially similar to..."
MPEP: 2173.05(b)
Fix: Define 'substantially' in specification or use objective criteria
IMPORTANT ISSUES:
...
MINOR ISSUES:
...Integration with MPEP
For each issue, the skill can:
- Search MPEP for relevant guidance
- Provide specific MPEP section citations
- Show examiner guidance on similar issues
- Suggest fixes based on USPTO practice
Tools Available
- Read: To load claims from files
- Bash: To run Python analyzer
- Write: To save analysis reports