Crimson Insights combines claim-focused analysis, patent and non-patent literature research, and iterative searching to help US patent litigation teams investigate relevant prior art. Our approach centers on the technical limitations that matter to your case, with reporting tailored to the agreed scope and fixed-fee engagements based on the number of claims and the technology involved.
The right search partner needs to understand more than the general subject of a patent. It needs to investigate the disclosures counsel is looking for, follow promising leads, and communicate findings clearly.
A search built around the relevant claims
We begin by studying the patent, the selected claims, relevant prosecution history, known references, and the dates applicable to the engagement.
Breaking claims into searchable technical limitations helps distinguish broadly similar documents from references that disclose features relevant to counsel’s analysis. The search can focus on selected independent or dependent claims, particular limitations, or a broader claim set.
Research across patent and non-patent literature
Relevant disclosures may appear outside familiar patent databases. Depending on the technology and agreed scope, Crimson searches sources such as:
- US and international patents and published applications.
- Scientific papers and conference publications.
- Technical standards and related materials.
- Product manuals, datasheets, and technical documentation.
- Books, theses, and technical reports.
- Archived websites and historical product information.
The source selection follows the technical issue being investigated. A standards-related feature may require a different research path from a feature described in historical product documentation.
An iterative approach to finding prior art
Earlier publications do not always use the terminology found in the asserted patent. We investigate alternative expressions, historical terminology, classifications, citations, inventors, assignees, and related technical concepts.
Promising references can reveal additional search paths. We use those leads to refine and expand the investigation rather than treating the initial keywords as the limit of the search.
Findings organized for counsel’s review
Depending on the agreed deliverables, results can include relevant references, technical passages, figures, publication and priority information, and observations explaining their potential relevance.
Claim-limitation mapping or claim charts are available where requested. These help organize identified disclosures against the selected limitations and support counsel’s evaluation of the findings.
Our research supports legal analysis; counsel determines the legal significance of the references.
Rolling results for time-sensitive matters
For time-sensitive engagements, promising references can be shared while the search continues, where agreed. This gives counsel an opportunity to assess early findings and discuss areas requiring further investigation.
Share your preferred timeline when requesting a proposal so we can discuss availability, priorities, and reporting milestones.
Fixed-fee engagements defined around your matter
Crimson offers fixed-fee patent invalidity search engagements. The fee depends on the number of claims and the technology involved.
Providing the patent, selected claims, known references, and technical context helps us discuss the scope and prepare a matter-specific quotation.
Discuss your patent invalidity search
Choosing a search firm starts with matching its approach to the needs of the matter. Crimson brings together claim-focused research, broad source coverage, iterative investigation, and scope-specific reporting to support that process.
Contact Crimson Insights with the patent number, claims to be searched, known references, and preferred timeline to discuss your search and request a fixed-fee quotation.