How AI is Helping Patent Attorneys

Drafting patent applications can be an arduous task. The process often requires several interactions with inventors to extract enough information to start the process, and then begins the exercise of turning that information into a coherent and detailed ~30 page patent specification. This of course takes time (and sometimes more than the proposed/estimated fee for the draft would allow). For this reason, patent drafting is sometimes considered a loss leader by those in private practice. 

From another perspective, the cost of engaging a patent attorney to draft a patent application can be a huge barrier to the uptake of IP, particularly for start-ups and SMEs. Registered IP rights can mean a great deal to these types of applicants, both in terms of carving out a slice of the market and attractiveness to potential investors. Drafting patent applications has thus historically presented a ‘problem’ to both patent attorneys and their would-be clients. 

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the game in this regard. Forward-thinking attorneys that have already started utilising AI, and those using Solve Intelligence’s Patent Drafting Copilot have reported considerable improvements in their drafting practices. Such improvements are capable of tackling the drafting problem, providing benefits to both attorneys and their clients or companies alike. We’ve highlighted some of these improvements below.

How AI is Helping Patent Attorneys

Increased Efficiency in Drafting

Some of the most common feedback we receive, from attorneys who have used our Patent Drafting Copilot, is an increase in drafting efficiency. This means less time spent drafting for a patent specification of the same quality when compared to traditional methods. In some cases, attorneys are reporting an increase of efficiency of 40-60% when using our platform. Efficiency gains are picked up in a number of areas.

The Patent Drafting Copilot is particularly adept at helping attorneys draft routine aspects of a patent application, such as the Technical Field, Background, and Summary of Invention sections, with minimal oversight required to produce the desired output. This alone can save hours of time for a single draft.

The capability of the Patent Drafting Copilot in allowing attorneys to add, edit, and even generate figures using AI, means that attorneys can draft complete specifications in one place, without having to worry about using different programs, or keeping track of updates to content across different files. Changes or additions to figures can also be replicated across the entire specification using the AI - meaning less time spent on complicated version-control issues. 

Our Patent Drafting Copilot also provides a consistency in output that many attorneys find valuable, particularly when working across multiple drafts for different applications. This is further improved when attorneys provide custom instructions to the AI, to allow the AI to draft in their particular style in a repeatable and reliable manner.

Overcoming Writer’s Block

One of the most challenging parts of drafting a patent application is often getting started. Fleshing out a detailed patent specification from a page or so of invention disclosure usually requires extensive planning, brainstorming out aspects such as alternative embodiments, variations in features, and what figures to include. 

One of the key advantages of our Patent drafting Copilot lies in tackling this issue. Attorneys can interact with the AI as early in the process as the invention harvesting stage, to request the AI to suggest alternative applications, alternative embodiments, and figure ideas, from just a few paragraphs of invention disclosure from an inventor. 

Each of these functionalities can be used to provide attorneys with a number of avenues to explore based on an invention disclosure, from which they can expand on quickly and effectively.

Enhanced Quality: More Time for Complex and Critical Tasks

While efficiency is essential, attorneys have emphasized that quality remains their top priority. In improving efficiency, our Patent Drafting Copilot frees up time for attorneys, allowing them to spend more time focusing on the complex areas of drafting, and in more inventor interaction, for example. We have had feedback that this has led to increases in output quality compared to traditional drafting methods. Attorneys using the Patent Drafting Copilot now have more time to focus on making sure claims align with the particular IP strategy of their clients, and can also spend more time extracting technical details from inventors. There’s also more time for the review of the draft between attorneys and their clients, and the Patent Drafting Copilot makes it easier than ever to implement changes based on such reviews.

Supporting Any Workflow: Flexible Integration with Attorney Practices

Our Patent Drafting Copilot is designed with adaptability in mind, and can fit seamlessly into any attorney workflow. This allows attorneys using our platform to continue following their well-established methods of drafting applications without disruption. 

Our platform has the capability of adapting the output of the AI to match a particular drafting style. With a little fine-tuning to AI instructions (which can be used across multiple applications), attorneys are able to generate sections of patent specifications using AI in a manner that reflects their own particular style of drafting such sections. This can be extended to the different styles required by different clients, for example.

Since the attorney is always in control of the AI in our Patent Drafting Copilot, attorneys can draft applications as they see fit, interacting as much or as little with the AI as they would like. This also means that attorneys can adjust their workflows and their use of AI as they see fit over time, or as their clients’ demands change. 

A Future of Collaboration between AI and Attorneys

The benefits to attorneys set out above represent only some of the feedback we have received on how our Patent Drafting Copilot is positively impacting the process of drafting patent applications. And it’s not just patent attorneys that benefit - efficiency gains and increases in output quality can improve the offering to applicants who engage attorneys using our Patent Drafting Copilot.

Here at Solve Intelligence, we are committed to building AI-powered platforms to assist with every aspect of the patenting process while keeping patent professionals at the helm of these powerful tools. In this way, we give patent practitioners the control needed to reap AI's benefits while mitigating its associated challenges. Our Patent Copilot™ helps with patent drafting, patent filing, patent prosecution, office action analysis, patent portfolio strategy and management. At each stage, our Patent Copilot™ works with the patent professional, keeping them 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.

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

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.

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.

Navigating epi AI Guidelines with Confidence: How Solve Intelligence Supports Compliance

In 2024, the Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office (epi) published its Guidelines on the Use of Generative AI in the Work of Patent Attorneys. These Guidelines provide practical guardrails for the responsible use of generative AI in patent practice, reaffirming that professional responsibility, confidentiality, and transparency remain central when AI tools are used.

In our earlier blog post, we outlined the key principles set out in the epi Guidelines. Since then, the Guidelines themselves have not changed. However, the use of AI in patent workflows has continued to mature, and so has Solve Intelligence.

This update highlights how Solve Intelligence supports compliance with the epi Guidelines in day-to-day practice, focusing on concrete product capabilities and supporting processes.

Patent Attorneys' Guide to Adopting AI: The First 30 Days

Artificial intelligence is already reshaping patent practice, but adopting it swiftly, efficiently and securely is where most firms get stuck. Patent professionals know the productivity upside to using gen AI tools, yet often get derailed when informal experiments run into real-world problems: client confidentiality concerns, inferior work-product quality, delayed internal approvals, and decision-fatigue.

This guide lays out a practical, 30-day plan for adopting AI in patent work, moving from ad hoc trials to a controlled, firm-ready strategy. It shows how you can run a focused pilot, set clear guardrails, train attorneys, and document decisions in a way that satisfies partners, clients, and internal stakeholders.