Tools for inventors.

What these databases can and can't do

USPTO (United States). Full text — title, abstract, complete specification, and claims — for every US patent grant from 1976 to present, plus published applications back to 2001. This is the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's own record, loaded directly from official weekly bulk data and kept current by an automated weekly update. Coverage does not include pre-1976 US patents (those exist only as scanned images in USPTO's own systems, not as searchable text here), and does not include un-granted, abandoned, or still-pending applications that were never published.

EPO (Europe). Published European applications and granted patents from 1978 to present, kept current by an automated weekly update since September 2026. Coverage works differently than USPTO, and it matters for what you'll get back:

• Published applications (kind codes A1/A2) are full text — description and claims included, same as USPTO.
• Granted patents (kind codes B1/B2) are bibliographic and claims only — no full description text is stored for the grant itself. If you need the full description of a granted EP patent, its earlier A1/A2 publication (same publication number, different kind code) usually has it.
• Search-report publications (kind code A3) are not included as searchable full-text records.
• Assignee data is not currently populated for EPO records.
• This is a text-search corpus built for lookup and dossier-building, not a live mirror of the EPO's official register — always confirm legal status (pending / granted / opposed / lapsed) directly with the EPO before relying on it for a decision.
• EPO patent numbers must include the kind code to be found (e.g. EP3585221A1, not just EP3585221) — the same publication number is reused across A1/A2/B1/B2, so the kind code is what tells them apart.

Neither database is a substitute for a professional prior art search, a legal status check, or advice from a registered patent attorney or agent. They're a fast, free way to pull the text of patents you already know the number of.

Free Idea Analysis Prompt

Before you talk to a patent professional, it helps to have your idea organized — what problem it solves, exactly how it works, what's different about it, and what you still don't know. This free prompt runs that process for you in Claude, ChatGPT, or any capable AI assistant, and ends with a write-up you can bring to a patent attorney or agent.

Instructions

Download the prompt, copy everything between its START and END markers into a new AI conversation, and answer its questions as completely as you can. It works through four parts and finishes with an organized summary — that's the part worth saving.

Before you use it — please read

• This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client or agent-client relationship.
• It cannot search for prior art and cannot tell you whether your idea is novel or patentable — only a real search and a qualified patent professional's judgment can do that.
• AI assistants can be confidently wrong about patent law, procedure, or deadlines. Verify independently.
• Public disclosure warning: typing your idea into a public AI chat service is itself a disclosure. The US gives you a one-year grace period after your own public disclosure, but most other countries require absolute novelty with no grace period — an early disclosure can permanently forfeit patent rights outside the US. If international protection matters to you, talk to a patent professional before you describe your idea anywhere, including to an AI tool.
• Check the terms of service of whichever AI tool you use — some providers may use conversation content to train future models unless you opt out.

Want to go further than a one-time analysis — a calibrated prior art search across USPTO, EPO, and Google Patents, guided claim drafting, and a full provisional specification? See Prompt Library Pro.