Calibrate
the read.
AI invalidity search + infringement analysis for patent litigators.
Two products, two opposite jobs. Invalidate a claim by searching 6.3M U.S. patents and 136.7M papers — anticipation and obviousness, element by element. Or read your portfolio against a target's products to prove infringement. Both score every claim element 0–100 and cite it to the source.
⟨1c⟩ goes to obviousness
Break the claim with the prior-art landscape.
Paste a claim and a priority date. Search 6.3M U.S. patents and 136.7M scientific papers, then read the field as a heat-map — and assemble anticipation and obviousness, element by element, with citations verified against the source PDFs.
- Search the whole landscape6.3M U.S. patents (full text) + 136.7M papers, filtered to predate a priority date.
- Heat-map the readsEvery claim element scored 0–100 against every reference — gaps visible, not averaged away.
- Anticipation and obviousnessOne primary reference for §102; primary + secondary with a motivation-to-combine for §103.
- PDF-verified citationsEach passage checked against the source PDF — exact column and line, not model-invented.
- Litigation-ready contentionsPrimary & secondary mapped per element, exported to Word.
| PRIMARY US-6,210,987 A |
US-7,001,455 B2 | US-5,998,210 A | PAPER Park 2012 |
US-6,884,300 B1 | PAPER Chen 2010 |
US-7,330,772 B2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⟨1pre⟩ sensor node | 84 | 70 | 66 | 58 | 72 | 49 | 61 |
| ⟨1a⟩ transceiver | 88 | 72 | 41 | 54 | 63 | 37 | 69 |
| ⟨1b⟩ duty cycle | 79 | 63 | 38 | — | 57 | 44 | 52 |
| ⟨1c⟩ harvesting | 48 | 86 | — | 61 | 33 | 70 | 29 |
| ⟨1d⟩ memory | 71 | 55 | 69 | 44 | 60 | 41 | 58 |
| ⟨1e⟩ scheduled wake | 66 | 51 | — | 77 | 48 | 63 | 39 |
| avg | 73 | 66 | 53 | 59 | 56 | 51 | 51 |
| Element | Primary citations — US-6,210,987 A | Secondary contributions |
|---|---|---|
| ⟨1a⟩ transceiver | ✓ Col. 4, ll. 12–18 — “a low-power RF front end…” | Met by primary. |
| ⟨1c⟩ harvesting | △ Col. 8, ll. 2–5 · thin (48) — “a battery or external supply” | US-7,001,455 B2 — “photovoltaic harvester” + motivation to combine |
| ⟨1e⟩ scheduled wake | △ Col. 7, ll. 14–19 · thin (66) — “periodically activates the radio” | Park 2012 — “fixed wake schedule” + motivation to combine |
Read your portfolio against their products.
Different job, different inputs. Map your patents' claims to a target's product documentation, argue each read through a simulated proceeding, and rank candidates by a calibrated infringement score — with evidence per element.
- Map claims to productsUpload your portfolio and the target's datasheets — not a public corpus. Mapped element by element.
- Adversarial verificationA four-phase proceeding: Plaintiff opens, Defense challenges, Plaintiff rebuts, a Judge rules.
- Evidence from three sourcesProduct datasheets, the web, and your own related patents — weighted per element.
- Calibrated & rankedA single score blends the verdict with the screening prior; strongest cases surface first.
- System-claim awareMulti-device claims are flagged so a single-product read doesn't undercount them.
Every limitation reads on the Hub Pro — gateway, up to 250 wireless nodes, Ethernet/LTE backhaul, and a TDMA mode that schedules slots to avoid collisions.
The default configuration is contention-based (CSMA); the scheduling limitation isn't met there.
All limitations supported on the record; 14[d] rests on the documented TDMA mode — a fact question well-suited to discovery. Advance the candidate.
From a portfolio — or a single claim — to an evidence-cited chart. In minutes, not weeks.
Two instruments.
One workspace.
Invalidate a claim or read a portfolio for infringement — built by patent litigators, for patent litigators. Tell us about the matter and we'll set you up.