Patent PreCheck evaluates your invention against existing prior art, assesses it against the criteria an examiner will actually apply, and identifies what needs to be improved — or advises you not to file at all. Many tools will sell you a patent application for an idea that was already patented in 2019. We won’t.
Encrypted at rest · Delete anytime · Not used to train Patent PreCheck models · Free scans discarded after scoring · Security
Rigorous · Honest · Examiner-grade · Before you commit
Novelty read, closest references, plain-English overlap, and a proceed / caution / stop verdict. Free.
§101, enablement, claim breadth, obviousness exposure — every weakness with a specific fix, not “add more detail.”
Disclosure-specific monitoring while your application is pending. Quiet weeks stay quiet.
Screen free → Interactive Code Review $69.95 → Filing Packet $199 · vs AI drafting tools
No problem — we can help. AI-assisted code can absolutely be patentable. We score what you actually built, show how your direction and decisions strengthen the claim, and coach you on the documentation that proves human conception.
AI-code patentability hub → · Can AI-generated code be patented? →
General AI chatbots explain patent law well. They aren’t built to search real USPTO files or score your specific code.
Patent PreCheck adds what chat alone can’t: a searchable prior-art index, pillar-by-pillar scores, and actionable next steps on your work. See the comparison below — or run your own check.
| General AI chatbots ChatGPT · Claude · Perplexity · Gemini |
Patent PreCheck | |
|---|---|---|
| Explains patent law (§101 / §102 / §103 / §112) | Yes | Yes — runs on the same frontier models |
| Searches real prior art (granted patents, applications, worldwide) | No — can't retrieve it | Yes — 2,100,000+ real records |
| Surfaces specific references you can open | No — often invents patent numbers | Yes — links to the closest real prior art |
| Novelty & obviousness checked against actual documents | No — guesses | Yes — semantic match to real filings |
| Separate score per statute | No — one vague verdict | Yes — §101/§102/§103/§112 broken out |
| Calibrated to real USPTO grant/rejection outcomes | No — confidence is vibes | Yes |
| Examiner-style (looks for reasons you'd be rejected) | Tends to agree with you | Yes — adversarial by design |
| Consistent, repeatable result | Changes with how you phrase it | Same rubric every time; calibration layer is deterministic |
| Up to date with recent case law & USPTO guidance | Limited by training cutoff | Yes — daily legal-intel feed |
| Reviews your actual code / disclosure interactively | Partial | Yes — Interactive Code Review |
| Structured report you can act on & track | No | Yes |
| Cost & speed | ~$20/mo, general-purpose | Free score in < 60 sec · $69.95 review (no subscription) |
| Replaces a patent attorney | No | No — it's pre-filing triage, not legal advice |
| Bottom line | A confident guess | An evidence-backed score |
Prior-art corpus: 2,100,000+ indexed documents (USPTO, EPO, PTAB, scholarly & code sources). Score calibration and data sources: methodology · legal intelligence · sample report.
Same frontier models. The difference is the evidence layer.
Also compare DIY search & attorneys →
Patent PreCheck is a pre-filing assessment tool, not legal advice or a substitute for a licensed patent attorney.
Don’t want to leave your AI tool? You don’t have to.
Add one line to Cursor or Claude — hosted at patentprecheck.com/mcp — then ask “run a patent precheck on this.” 12 tools, no USPTO keys.
Or paste code in the browser — results in about a minute.
MCP setup (1 line) →Patent PreCheck™ compares your invention against issued patents, abandoned applications, examiner rejections, PTAB outcomes, and open technical literature — refreshed on a daily ingest cycle so scores reflect current filings, not a static snapshot.
You’ll see which areas need stronger differentiation, which language patterns draw pushback in your space, and where to focus before filing fees. Want to go deeper? The Interactive Code Review adds live USPTO search, a 200-match overlap analysis, and Federal Circuit–informed coaching on every pillar.
USPTO filings, examination records, academic research, and open-source prior art in software and technology areas.
Daily updates from authoritative sources as new filings and decisions are published.
USPTO ODP, PatentsView, PTAB, and daily legal-intelligence feeds — not scraped blog summaries.
Complete analysis in under 60 seconds.
We’re not attorneys, and we don’t replace one. But we’ll save you significant time and money before you get to that stage — so when you do meet with counsel, you arrive prepared.
The Patentability Score tells you if it can be patented. The Filing Readiness Score tells you if your documentation is strong enough to file. The Human Conception Score tells you how well the record shows the invention is yours, not your AI tool’s. All scored against our continuously updated prior-art index and current USPTO practice.
Want to go deeper? Upgrade to the Interactive Code Review for live USPTO search, 200-match overlap, and coaching on every pillar.
Whether you're a solo developer, a founder, or a small team — you can evaluate your idea without hiring an attorney first.
Three clear scores in seconds. Patentability tells you if the idea can be patented. Filing Readiness tells you if your documentation is strong enough to file. Human Conception tells you how well the record shows the invention is yours. All backed by five plain-English USPTO requirements.
The Interactive Code Review shows specifically what to strengthen, pillar by pillar — with the language patterns that have historically succeeded in your technical area. Weak ideas get cleaner; strong ideas get stronger.
What normally takes weeks of back-and-forth with an attorney takes about 60 seconds. Upload your work, get your scores, see exactly what matters — then decide your next step with real information.
Free to check. Your first invention’s Interactive Code Review is $69.95; each additional invention is $49.95. Reviewing five à la carte costs $269.75 one-time; Portfolio covers the same five for $179 in a single month, plus monitoring, if you review them together. An attorney-drafted utility filing typically runs $8,000–$17,000. Use Patent PreCheck first so that when you do bring in an attorney, you're arriving ready.
The scores and diagnosis above are free. The paid Interactive Code Review adds deep prior-art search, pillar-by-pillar coaching, and filing-ready exports — see the full free-vs-paid comparison below.
Portfolio, notebook, monitoring, and guided filing compound protection over time — after you know the idea is worth pursuing.
The primary path is three steps — not seven products. Everything else is optional once you know the idea is worth pursuing.
Upload or paste code, get your free report, optionally email it to yourself, then apply coaching suggestions in plain English and watch your patentability score update. Illustrative walkthrough — not your code.
Patent PreCheck analyzes your actual code — not just keyword search — and tells you which pillar is holding you back.
| Patent PreCheck Free |
Patent PreCheck $69.95 review |
Attorney opinion | DIY / nothing | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typical cost | $0 | $69.95 | $8k–$17k+ | $0 |
| Time to first signal | < 60 sec | < 60 sec + 30-day review | Days–weeks | Unknown |
| Analyzes your code | Yes | Yes | Sometimes | No |
| Weakest-pillar diagnosis | Yes | Yes + coaching | Attorney judgment | No |
Indexed prior-art corpus (2,000,000+ documents, USPTO · EPO · PTAB · scholarly & code sources) and score calibration: methodology · legal intelligence
Full comparison → · vs Evalify · vs Patentable · vs Google Patents
Same engine — the paid Interactive Code Review adds depth, coaching, and deliverables you can share with counsel.
| Free score | Interactive Code Review | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $0 | $69.95 one-time |
| Time | Under 60 seconds | 30-day coaching window |
| Prior art | 12 closest matches, top titles shown | 200 matches + deep report (up to 500 refs) |
| Coaching | Weakest-pillar diagnosis | Live edits on your code, score updates as you improve |
| Deliverables | PDF scorecard, report ID, optional email | Word filing draft, ZIP package, tracked changes, inventorship analysis |
| Best for | Quick triage — is it worth pursuing? | Filing-ready package before attorney time |
Sample report → · Case study →
A filing-ready Word draft of your disclosure, a tracked-changes export showing every coached improvement, your inventorship analysis (human vs. AI contribution), a dated PDF scorecard, and the complete ZIP package to hand your attorney.
One-time payment, no subscription. If service unavailability ever prevents you from completing your session, you get a full refund — otherwise the fee is non-refundable once your review window opens. Refund policy
Guided copyright and provisional filing — $99 each, or the Filing Packet ($199): Interactive Code Review plus both guided filing paths. See full pricing & plans →
Alice, prior art, inventorship, and how we score your code — written for developers, not law students.
We dogfood Patent PreCheck on this product’s codebase. Read the case study, explore a sample report, or see reviews.
No account. No card. Just upload your work and know where you stand in about a minute.
Get your free score →