Solve Intelligence Joins Intel Ignite

Intel® Ignite announce that Solve Intelligence™ is among the 2024 Intel Ignite companies.

Intel® Ignite just announced that Solve Intelligence™ is among the 2024 Intel® Ignite companies.

Intel® is one of the world’s most prolific filers of patents, with 7K+ applications each year and a portfolio of 100K+ active patents.

Solve™ will be mentored by Intel®'s IP team to continue its mission to help outside counsel, in-house IP teams, and inventors use AI to elevate the efficiency and quality with which they generate and manage patents.

This development will be instrumental in our mission to accelerate innovation.

Read Intel® Ignite’s full announcement: https://intelignite.com/meet-the-startups-selected-for-intel-ignites-spring-2024-uk-cohort

Solve's generative AI patent drafting software is the leading AI patent drafting tool for helping patent attorneys and legal professionals draft and review patent applications. Backed by Y Combinator, and having raised $3M from Silicon Valley's top investors, Solve is leveraging artificial intelligence to help with every part of the patent drafting process.

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

Kevin Johnson to join Solve Intelligence’s Customer Advisory Board

We’re excited to welcome Kevin Johnson, partner at Quinn Emanuel, to Solve Intelligence’s Customer Advisory Board.

Read Now

USPTO Memo: Reminders for AI & Software Inventions

On August 4, 2025, the USPTO issued a memorandum to software-related art units about subject matter eligibility for AI and computer-implemented claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The memo emphasizes that it "is not intended to announce any new USPTO practice or procedure and is meant to be consistent with existing USPTO guidance".

This memo builds on and refers to previous July 2024 AI guidance. That guidance provided new examples and analytical frameworks for examining AI inventions. This memo attempts to ensure those frameworks are consistently applied across art units.

The memo addresses four areas where examiners often lack consistency when applying the Alice/Mayo steps: mental process analysis, distinguishing claims that recite versus involve judicial exceptions, analyzing claims as a whole, and determining when rejections are appropriate.

Read Now