Last updated: September 25, 2026.
Teams evaluating AI patent prosecution software in 2026 typically compare Solve Intelligence, Patent Bots, Patlytics, DeepIP, Black Hills AI (Otto IP), ClaimMaster, and Juristat. Most tools focus on either office action drafting or examiner analytics, not both. Solve Intelligence pairs full office action response drafting with claim charting, and a September 2026 Juristat integration brings examiner analytics into the same platform for Juristat subscribers.
Patent prosecution is where a patent application becomes a granted patent. It involves responding to office actions, amending claims, managing examiner correspondence, and navigating jurisdiction-specific guidelines. It's time-intensive, detail-heavy, and historically a manual endeavor.
AI patent prosecution software is changing the landscape. The best tools can now generate office action responses, assess examiner statistics across art units, flag antecedent basis errors, and manage documents across the full application process. Some focus on drafting and response generation, while others specialize in prosecution analytics and examiner forecasting. Few tools cover both.
This comparison covers seven tools, built from current product pages, trust centers, and public announcements from each vendor, along with funding and certification details from public sources. Solve Intelligence is included as one of the platforms reviewed. If anything here is inaccurate, please contact us and we'll update it.
Solve Intelligence covers the full patent drafting and prosecution workflow on one platform, so an office action response and the claim chart informing it never have to leave the same project. Responses draw on jurisdiction-specific legal texts, including the MPEP and US court and PTAB decisions, the EPO Guidelines and Boards of Appeal case law, UPC law and case law, the UK MOPP, IP Australia's PMPP, DPMA guidance and German case law, and the JPO Guidelines. They also cover claims involving chemical structures and biological sequences. Solve Review (launched February 2026 and extended to Prosecution in March 2026) adds structured, AI-powered patent review. Charts (launched December 2025) handles invalidity and SEP charts, freedom-to-operate and clearance analyses, infringement mapping, claim construction, portfolio-level reviews, and UPC litigation workflows.
Invention disclosures and AI-powered figure creation and editing (Figure Builder) round out the earlier stages of the process. Solve Assistant, added in June 2026, runs complex workflows end-to-end from a single chat interface, including legal research and searches across Solve's datasets. Within Drafting and Prosecution, the built-in Chat answers questions in real time as attorneys draft or respond to an office action. A September 2026 partnership with Juristat brings examiner analytics and two decades of USPTO prosecution history directly into that same workflow for customers who also subscribe to Juristat. Microsoft 365 and iManage integrations keep files and application data in one place throughout.
Solve Intelligence ranked first in the Patents/IP category of the 2026 SKILLS Legal AI survey of 130 leading law firms. More than 700 IP teams, spanning law firms and corporate legal departments, use the platform, including DLA Piper, Siemens, Ashurst, Perkins Coie, and Amgen. The company doesn't train on customer data, holds SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 certification, is GDPR compliant, and is working toward ISO 42001 conformance. It has zero data retention agreements with its LLM providers and offers separate US and EU deployments for data residency.
See Solve Intelligence's prosecution workflow in action. Request a demo.
Knowing how a specific examiner tends to rule, before drafting a single word of a response, is the idea behind Patent Bots. Its Patent Quality Rankings, now in their sixth year, turn USPTO data into art-unit-level statistics on allowance rates and response patterns, so an attorney can shape strategy around a real examiner's tendencies rather than guessing. Generative drafting and review tools were added more recently, letting the same platform draft first passes and catch antecedent basis errors before filing. Data isn't retained, and the company holds SOC 2 certification.
Prosecution is only one part of what Patlytics does. Office action analysis and claim amendments sit alongside invalidity, infringement detection, and patent landscape work, reflecting the platform's roots in litigation and portfolio analytics rather than drafting. Founded in January 2024, it holds SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and ISO 42001 certification.
DeepIP works inside Word itself, so drafting and responding to an office action happens in the same document an attorney would already be using, without switching to a separate platform. Its jurisdiction coverage extends to CNIPA and KIPO alongside USPTO, EPO, and PCT. Originally launched as davinci in 2024, it holds SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, GDPR, and HIPAA certification, which suits firms working in life sciences and other regulated sectors.
Black Hills AI's Otto IP is built for a different job than drafting: managing patents at volume. Its Guided Skills generate office action response shells, handle docketing, and keep documents organized across FoundationIP, CPI, AltLegal, and other practice management systems firms already run, with a DeepIP partnership syncing file wrappers automatically. It suits IP professionals and support staff managing dozens of routine actions, rather than drafting an application from a blank page.
A decade of doing one job well is ClaimMaster's pitch: catching antecedent basis errors, claim dependency problems, and other filing mistakes before they reach the examiner. It runs locally as a Word plug-in, so patent data never leaves the firm's own system, a meaningful distinction for practices wary of cloud tools. GPT-5 and Claude integration, added recently, brings LLM-assisted office action analysis, and the Drafting tier extends into full patent application creation. Pricing starts at approximately $360/year.
No drafting happens inside Juristat at all. What it does instead is predict and automate: examiner statistics across more than 10 million patent applications inform prosecution strategy before a response is written, automated response shells save 30 to 60 minutes per case, and IDS generation works through family traversal rather than manual entry. Founded in 2013, with a growth investment from Advantage Capital in November 2025.
The key differences between these tools come down to what your team needs. If your focus is end-to-end drafting and prosecution, Solve Intelligence covers the most ground. If examiner data needs to shape prosecution strategy, look for a platform built specifically around that kind of analytics. If your work spans prosecution, litigation, and portfolio management together, weigh how broad a platform you actually need.
Consider how the tool will integrate with existing workflows. Some tools embed directly into Word (keeping drafting in a familiar interface) while cloud platforms like Solve Intelligence offer broader features through a Word-compatible editor, with Microsoft 365 and iManage integration and a desktop app. If your team handles European patent prosecution, check that the tool supports EPO-specific guidance and workflows. Review certifications, data retention policies, and where files are stored before you implement anything.
If your work also touches landscape analysis, claim charts, or portfolio decisions, see our comparison of patent analysis software for how those tools stack up.
AI prosecution tools handle the repetitive tasks that consume the most time: generating first-draft office action responses, checking claims for errors, managing prior art references, and tracking examiner patterns. That lets attorneys focus on prosecution strategy, client work, and the higher-value services that grow a firm.
For firms doing fixed fee work, the same team can produce higher quality patents and make data driven decisions without adding headcount. To see this in practice, read how Marbury Law Group built AI into their prosecution workflow.
Each tool on this list solves a different problem. The right choice depends on your firm's specific needs: drafting and prosecution, examiner analytics, cost control, or operational automation. Evaluate based on workflow fit, data coverage, and security to find the right value for your team.
If you're also evaluating drafting tools, our comparison of the best AI patent drafting tools covers the same platforms from a drafting perspective. For a deeper look at how AI fits into the patent lifecycle, see our guide on how to automate patent drafting with AI.
Ready to see how Solve Intelligence handles prosecution?
Look for tools with published, lower-cost pricing and local-only processing if budget and data control are the priority. Tools with strong examiner data can also help smaller practices sharpen prosecution strategy and demonstrate quality to prospective clients.
Solve Intelligence can handle office actions from any jurisdiction. It has dedicated workflows and legal sources for the USPTO, EPO, UPC, UK IPO, DPMA, IP Australia, JPO, and PCT, and register access to further offices including INPI, the Indian Patent Office, CNIPA, and KIPO. Coverage varies significantly across the market, so check jurisdiction support directly with each vendor if non-US prosecution is a priority.
No. They generate drafts, automate tasks, and surface data, but a patent attorney still needs to review, assess, and finalize every document. The goal is to save time on the application process and enhance quality, not to operate without oversight.
Solve Intelligence generates office action responses across utility patents including those with chemical structures, biological sequences, and complex technical claims. It draws on guidance and case law including the MPEP and US court and PTAB decisions; the EPO Guidelines and Boards of Appeal case law; the UPCA, UPC Rules of Procedure, and UPC case law; the UK MOPP and IP Australia's PMPP; the German Patent Act, DPMA guidelines, and German case law; and the JPO Examination Guidelines and Handbook.
Examiner analytics tools analyze historical examiner behavior and allowance rates to inform prosecution decisions before drafting begins. Office action drafting tools like Solve Intelligence generate the response documents themselves. Some firms use both categories together, assessing the examiner first, then generating the response.
.avif)
