ClaimScore
Read thousands of claims the way a patent lawyer reads one
ClaimScore measures claim breadth by what a claim commits to, not how long it is, pairing a grammar built on patent law with natural language processing technology.
The law
Claim review can’t be rushed
Every patent attorney knows the process. You read every claim, weigh each word, and work through every limitation to decide which patents are truly valuable. It’s the right method, but it takes a skilled reader hours for a few patents.
The technology
So we taught software to read the same way
A claim’s breadth isn’t its length. It depends on how unusual its elements are and how tightly they’re connected. Repeating “said actuator” for antecedent basis adds nothing, while “each of the plurality of sensors” narrows a claim a lot in five words. ClaimScore measures both, across a whole portfolio, before anyone reads a word.
How it works
Four steps from claim text to a breadth score
- 1
Parse the claim the way the law reads it
A grammar built on the MPEP identifies each element. It discounts references back to earlier elements, treats words like “each” and “all” as narrowing, and gives means-plus-function language its own weight.
- 2
Measure the breadth of each element in the context of the claim
Each element’s commonality in the claimed area is measured.
- 3
Calculate across the claim
Element breadth ratings are summed by walking the parse tree of the claim based on the MPEP-based grammar.
- 4
Combine six measures into one score
A model fitted against real infringement findings combines claim measures, then maps the result onto a 1–100 scale.
- What gets scored
- Each patent’s broadest independent claim
- The scale
- 1 to 100, higher is broader, and 50 is the average US patent
This page describes the third generation of ClaimScore. Earlier generations relied on the claim-structure grammar alone; the current one adds language-model surprisal and a model fitted to infringement outcomes.
The results
Broader claims are found infringed more often
We scored 6,049 US patents that went through a contested infringement finding, each with a model that had never been fitted on it. Ratings are cut at the 10th, 30th, 70th and 90th percentiles of all US patents.
| Rating | Score | Share of US patents | Found infringed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Very narrow | under 27 | 10% | 28.8% |
| Narrow | 27–41 | 20% | 41.8% |
| Moderate | 41–60 | 40% | 45.2% |
| Broad | 60–73 | 20% | 49.8% |
| Very broad | over 73 | 10% | 59.4% |
- 3.6×
The odds of an infringement finding for very broad claims, against very narrow ones
- 6,049
Litigated US patents with a contested infringement finding. Consent and default judgments are left out.
- 0.582
AUC from claim language alone, on patents the model had never seen: the chance an infringed patent scores broader than one that wasn’t. A coin flip is 0.5.
In practice
Before its IPO, under pressure, with a lean IP team
- Hundreds of patent portfolios offered for sale
- Thousands of individual patents to evaluate
- A small IP team, focused on quality over quantity
- Pressure to find assets not yet on the broader market
Working directly with David Andrews, Uber built ClaimScore into its acquisition process.
“Prior to manual review of any patents, we run each offered portfolio through analysis software that implements our defined methodology…”
Kurt Brasch, Head of Patent Transactions, Uber
How we answered Uber’s questionWhere it’s used
Across the whole patent lifecycle
ClaimScore never works alone. A practitioner frames the question, reads what ClaimScore surfaces, and gives the final answer.
Read how ClaimScore answered real client questionsPortfolio management
- Find your broadest patents
- Compare claim breadth within families
- Inform prosecution and maintenance-fee decisions
Competitive intelligence
- Analyze competitors’ patent strength
- Find gaps in the market
- Track how portfolios change over time
Litigation support
- Pick the strongest claims to assert
- Set a starting estimate before an assertion
- Support case strategy
Transactions
- Triage portfolios offered for sale
- M&A due diligence
- Benchmark breadth across technology areas
The inventor
Built by someone who has written the code and argued the claims
David Andrews
A decade of software engineering at Microsoft, on the Windows kernel and Age of Empires. Then a summa cum laude law degree, a judicial clerkship, and high-stakes patent litigation. He is an inventor on several patents, including patents related to the ClaimScore algorithm.
The teamNeed a patent answer you can act on today?
Bring us the details, and we’ll help you tackle it
Or email us at inquiries@noveltyhillip.com