USPTO’s Guidance on the Use of Artificial Intelligence

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) increasingly integrate into legal practices, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued new guidance to assist patent attorneys and the public with its adoption, including the adoption of patent software and AI tools in assisting intellectual property attorneys with the patent drafting process, patent prosecution, and other areas of patent law.

USPTO’s Guidance on the Use of Artificial Intelligence

Below are some key takeaways from the USPTO’s guidance, the entirety of which can be found here

  1. The USPTO’s existing rules are sufficient to protect against any potential concerns with the use of generative AI tools in preparing patent drafts for filing at the USPTO.
  2. There is no prohibition against using AI in drafting documents, including patent applications, for submission to the USPTO and there is no general obligation to disclose when AI tools have been used. 
  3. The USPTO also provided some reminders of current obligations for practitioners using AI in patent application drafting, which are highlighted below.

Signatory and Review Requirements

When submitting documents to the USPTO, whether drafted with AI or not, all submissions must be signed and reviewed by the party responsible, ensuring the accuracy and verification of all information. Therefore, in its guidance, the USPTO emphasized that a signing party must still review the contents of any document filed before the USPTO for accuracy, and in the specific case of patent claims, that each claim has significant contribution by a human inventor. 

Duty of Disclosure Requirements

The USPTO also provided a reminder about the duty to disclose to the USPTO all information known to an individual to be material to patentability. Therefore, similar to all other patentability and duty of disclosure requirements, if the use of AI is material to patentability, the use of AI must be disclosed to the USPTO. With that said, there’s still no general obligation to disclose when AI tools have been used.

Inventorship Considerations

The USPTO recognized that AI can be used during the patent drafting process to draft or modify claims and claim language, and noted that such modifications could impact inventorship, as well as patentability. Therefore, although there is no general obligation to disclose when AI has been used, the USPTO provided the reminder that each named inventor must have significantly contributed to the claimed invention and practitioners should still continue to properly assess inventorship when using AI during the patent claim drafting process. 

Conclusion

The guidance provided by the U.S. Patent Office provides helpful information and considerations for the public on the use of AI for patent application drafting and prosecution. Here, at Solve Intelligence™, we are building the first AI-powered platform to assist with every aspect of the patenting process, including our Patent Copilot™, which assists with patent drafting, and future technology focused on patent filing, patent prosecution and office action analysis, patent portfolio strategy and management, and patent infringement analyses. At each stage, however, our Patent Copilot™ works with the patent professional and we have designed our products to keep patent professionals in the driving seat, thereby equipping legal professionals, law firms, companies, and inventors with the tools to help develop the full scope of protection for their inventions. We will continue to develop our products in view of these guidelines and any future guidance provided by patent offices around the world.

AI for patents.

Be 50%+ more productive. Join thousands of legal professionals around the World using Solve’s Patent Copilot™ for drafting, prosecution, invention harvesting, and more.

Related articles

Potter Clarkson Enhances Patent Practice with Solve Intelligence

Solve Intelligence is deployed at Potter Clarkson as a practitioner-led platform, designed to enhance - not replace - the expertise of experienced patent attorneys. The firm uses the technology primarily at a senior level, where skilled practitioners are able to prompt and interrogate the system effectively to guide high-quality outputs.

By combining advanced AI capability with deep technical and legal experience, the platform enables senior attorneys to work more efficiently while focusing their time and judgement on strategic advice, complex analysis and client value. This reflects the firm’s long-standing philosophy that technology should strengthen the role of the practitioner, not substitute professional expertise.

“At Potter Clarkson, our priority is delivering technically rigorous and strategically sound advice to our clients. We use Solve Intelligence as a tool in the hands of experienced patent attorneys - professionals who understand how to guide, challenge and refine AI-generated outputs. It allows our senior teams to concentrate on the aspects of drafting and prosecution where their judgement adds the greatest value, while maintaining full control over quality and client strategy.”

Peter Finnie, Partner, Potter Clarkson

Since rolling out Solve Intelligence’s Patent Copilot, the firm has tailored the platform to reflect its established house styles and drafting standards. This customisation reduces administrative burden and supports consistency across teams, enabling practitioners to engage with AI efficiently without compromising on quality, client-specific requirements, or the firm’s distinctive approach.

Peter Finnie to join Solve's Customer Advisory Board

We are excited to welcome Peter Finnie, Partner at Potter Clarkson, to Solve Intelligence’s Customer Advisory Board.

Reflections from IPWatchdog: Masterclass on AI Prompt Engineering for Patent Workflows

On February 5, 2026, Solve Intelligence hosted a masterclass with IPWatchdog on AI prompt engineering for patent workflows. Nearly 750 practitioners registered from across the world.

The level of experience in the room was striking: 75% of attendees had more than 11 years of patent experience, and over 40% had more than 20 years. A clear indication that decision-makers are staying on top of the latest trends and educational content on AI.

Key insights

  • Senior patent decision-makers are actively learning AI with 750 registrants and deep experience
  • AI is broadly permitted with most respondents reporting approval or active policy evaluation
  • Prompt engineering drives ROI with templates and structured instructions improving output quality

Watch the recording and download the slides

The recording covers the full prompt engineering framework for patent workflows, a live demonstration of prompting in action within Solve Intelligence across drafting, prosecution, and claim charting workflows, and a Q&A with the panel.

Download the slides here.

Client confidentiality in the age of AI: best practices for patent professionals

AI can improve the quality and efficiency of patent work - but it can also create new confidentiality and privilege risks if you don’t control what data is shared, where it’s stored, and who can access it. The good news: you can turn “AI risk” into a repeatable review process that your leadership, IT/security, and risk teams can sign off on with confidence.

This guide gives you a practical framework and a due diligence checklist, that you can use to evaluate AI tools for patent workflows without compromising client confidentiality.

Key takeaways

  • In patent work, confidentiality failures can jeopardise patent rights—treat inputs as high-risk.
  • Risk is more than training: retention, access, logs, human review, and subprocessors matter.
  • Use data tiers: Tier 0–1 OK; Tier 3 ‘default no’ unless explicitly approved and controlled.
  • Make it auditable: approved use cases, human review, matter separation, and vendor diligence.

For further information, read the full guidance below.