David Joo EPA
Written by: 
David Joo EPA
, 
Legally reviewed by: 
Justin Doop, Esq.
October 1, 2025

Building AI Tools That Patent Attorneys Trust

After countless conversations with patent attorneys across 5 continents, it’s clear that patent practitioners want AI tools that work like a trusted colleague who is always available, incredibly thorough, and has a genuine understanding of patent law.

At Solve Intelligence, we know what patent attorneys are dealing with because we've been there. Our team includes patent attorneys from firms like Dentons, Haley Guiliano, Quarles & Brady, and Reddie & Grose. We left private practice not to replace patent attorneys, but to build solutions to the problems we personally faced.

In this post, we share the experiences of Solve Intelligence customers who explain how our AI patent platform helps them work faster, with greater accuracy, and create more time for strategic client work. Their stories highlight the real world benefits patent attorneys are seeing in practice.

Building AI Tools That Patent Attorneys Trust
Click Here for Full 2025 Review

3x Faster Patent Drafting Without Sacrificing Quality

Joel Briscoe, Intellectual Property Advisor at Panoramix (previously in-house at British American Tobacco) experienced the difference firsthand: "Solve Intelligence has led to a 3x increase in speed with my patent application drafting and reviewing. Because of this, I'm now able to spend more time taking on additional client work while maintaining amazing quality."

This efficiency gain from using AI patent drafting software addresses a fundamental challenge in patent practice. As Sam Jinks, Patent Attorney and Counsel at Haley Guiliano explains: "Drafting a full and robust description consumes a large portion of the overall time allotted to complete a draft. Solve Intelligence’s Patent Copilot provides an intuitive system for time-efficient preparation of detailed descriptions."

Every patent attorney knows this reality. Attorneys are trained to identify inventive concepts, craft strategically relevant claims, and support clients in building robust IP portfolios. Yet they often spend hours on detailed descriptions, checking for inconsistencies, ensuring support based on updated claims, and incorporating reference numerals, leaving less time for strategic and creative work. 

AI Built for Real Patent Workflows

The goal is to allow practitioners to incorporate AI wherever and however they’d like. It's about understanding how patent preparation and prosecution actually works and maximizing value from every hour.

Sam highlights that Solve Intelligence ”allows for a larger balance of the time available to be used on the things that underpin 'why' a patent application has been filed – preparing robust claims and figures."

Rick Timmer, Senior Patent Agent at Brown Rudnick emphasized the importance of specialization to develop a solution for every subject matter: "We were particularly focused on application to patent work in the life sciences and chemical arts, and Solve Intelligence was one of the most robust tools we examined. Moreover, the product had the right balance in terms of prompt input and automation features – the overall user experience and interface was incredibly accessible."

Rick highlighted that after testing multiple similar tools, "Solve Intelligence was head and shoulders above all others. Since it is a cloud-based, browser-based product, implementation was a breeze and if one is familiar with the usual office tools, working with sequences, and chemical drawing software, it will be easy to implement and use."

Market Leading Customer Support from People Who Understand Patent Practice

Unlike typical software support in this field, when attorneys message Solve Intelligence about workflow issues, we know exactly what they're dealing with. Our Legal & Product Engineering team comes from patent practice, which shapes everything from how we respond to questions to how we prioritize features.

"The Solve Intelligence team is ready to answer queries and provide tips and support to get the best out of the tool," Sam notes.

Joel's experience goes deeper: "The team at Solve Intelligence are incredibly responsive and have a great onboarding programme with the developers themselves."

Enterprise Reliability Delivered with Rapid Iteration Based on Practitioner Feedback

At Solve Intelligence, we’ve built a product development process that combines the rigour enterprises expect with the agility patent practitioners need. Every update goes through structured quality checks and security reviews, yet we still release improvements faster than any other AI provider in the field.

Joel shared feedback that continues to motivate our team: "They've already taken feedback from me personally, implementing suggestions at lightning speed for me and their other users. It really does feel like the team is here to provide me with the best service they possibly can."

This isn't ad-hoc iteration. It’s a deliberate cycle of practitioner feedback, prioritisation, and disciplined delivery. Enhancements are added to our product roadmap, validated against enterprise use cases, and released in a way that balances responsiveness with reliability and inline with market leading security standards.

By combining enterprise grade stability with a feedback loop measured in weeks, not quarters, we ensure patent attorneys always have access to the most advanced and dependable AI drafting platform on the market.

Sam sees this commitment in action: "The constant functionality updates that the Solve Intelligence team provide are improving both the quality of output and time saved with each update."

Building in Partnership

There's something deeply satisfying about building tools that solve problems you've personally faced. The only way to get it right is to listen to IP teams using the product every day, then act on what they tell you.

Our Partnerships team spends their days on calls with patent attorneys and agents across teams of all sizes. We listen to how they mine inventions, structure disclosures, draft claims, prepare figures and descriptions, review applications, and prosecute them. These conversations directly shape what and how we build.

Rick summarized the key benefits of Solve Intelligence: "Customer service and willingness to listen to feedback; commitment to continued improvement, including responsiveness to user inputs; and overall robustness of the product and user interface."

We're building the future of patent practice at Solve Intelligence in partnership with our customers, and attorneys like Joel, Rick, and Sam who trust us to help them focus on strategy over repetition and serve their clients with greater creativity.

See additional case studies here.

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.

Request Demo

Related articles

UK Supreme Court aligns UK software patentability with EPO approach

The UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception decision moves UK practice closer to the EPO for computer implemented inventions, including AI. Claims with ordinary hardware will usually avoid the “computer program as such” exclusion, but only technical features can support inventive step. In practice, applicants should focus arguments and evidence on technical contribution and inventive step.

Key takeaways

  1. UK moves closer to EPO, inventive step becomes the main battleground.
  2. Ordinary hardware avoids exclusion, but may not support inventiveness.
  3. Only technical features count at inventive step, not business aims.
  4. Neural networks are treated as software, no special treatment either way.
  5. Draft around technical contribution, measurable effects, and system level impact.
Read Now

Kicking Off 2026: New Investors, New Customers, New Product Features

A lot has happened in the last two months. We wanted to take a moment to share what we've been building, who's joined us, and where we're headed next.

Since we started Solve, the goal has been simple: help IP teams do their best work by combining real-world patent expertise with deep AI research, intuitive UX, and state-of-the-art security. The momentum we're seeing across the business tells us the market agrees as 400+ IP teams across 6 continents now use Solve.

Here's what's new.

Read Now

Reflections from AUTM: What Tech Transfer Offices Really Need in 2026

Last week, my colleagues and I attended the annual meeting of AUTM, the global association for technology transfer professionals. For anyone building in the intellectual property (IP) space, it’s one of the most important rooms you can be in.

The three-day conference brings together high education decision-makers from around the world who are shaping how intellectual property is evaluated, protected, and commercialized. This year’s conversations revealed something important: the question is no longer if AI will influence tech transfer, but instead about how institutions will integrate it.

Read Now

PTAB Case Studies of AI Disclosure Requirements: Part I

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a fast-evolving field with new technical methods, systems, and products constantly being developed. This growth has also been reflected in the dramatic increase in patent filings for AI-related inventions. According to Patents and Artificial Intelligence: A Primer from the Center for Security and Emerging Technology, more than ten times as many AI-related patent applications were published worldwide in 2019 than in 2013, and the increasing trend has only continued since.

Although AI-related patent applications have been on the rise, explicit guidance on patentability requirements have only recently begun to be published by patent offices around the world. Indeed, as a burgeoning field of technology, AI inventions have unique features, such as the importance of training data and the lack of explainability and predictability of trained AI models, that differentiate such innovations from traditional types of computer-implemented inventions (CII). 

These features raise questions about the interpretation of disclosure requirements, among other patentability requirements, for AI-related inventions. For example, how much information, such as source code, training data sets, or machine learning model architectures, should be provided to satisfy the written description and enablement requirements of Title 35 of the U.S. Code § 112(a) or analogs in other patent jurisdictions?

As we await further official guidance from the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) on disclosure requirements for AI-related inventions, we can gather initial indications from recent patent prosecution decisions from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) on such issues. In this article, we study a selection of PTAB appeals decisions for applications for AI-related inventions rejected under § 112. To set the background, we first review a classification of AI inventions and USPTO guidelines on disclosure requirements for computer-implemented inventions. After analyzing three case studies, we conclude with general takeaways and best practices, which emphasize that applicants must disclose specific algorithms and implementation details, not just desired outcomes, to satisfy written description requirements.

Read Now
Product
Product

By clicking "Accept", you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information.

PreferencesRejectAccept
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Preferences