Prior Art Summary
Synthesizes prior art references into structured summaries mapping disclosures to claim elements for rapid landscape assessment.
Prerequisites
- Prior art references — patents, applications, publications, product docs, or public disclosures
- Invention description — claims or specification under analysis
- Scope directive — prosecution, validity/invalidity, or FTO
Workflow
1. Executive Overview
Produce a table covering:
- Total references reviewed (count)
- Most material references (top 3-5 with one-line rationale)
- Key gaps (claim elements with no or weak coverage)
- Art type breakdown (patents / applications / publications / other)
2. Individual Reference Summaries
For each reference:
| Field |
Content |
| Document ID |
Patent/pub number, DOI, or identifier |
| Title |
Full title |
| Date |
Pub/issue date; note effective prior art date if different |
| Inventor(s)/Author(s) |
Names |
| Technical field |
CPC/IPC classes or subject domain |
| Assignee/Publisher |
Entity |
Then include:
- Disclosure summary — 2-4 sentences on core technical contribution
- Key features — bulleted list with exact quoted language and precise citation (¶, col:line, page, figure)
- Gaps — what the reference does NOT disclose relative to the invention
3. Claim-Element Mapping
| Claim Element |
Ref. 1 |
Ref. 2 |
Ref. 3 |
| Element A |
¶[0032], Fig. 3 |
— |
p. 12 |
| Element B |
— |
Col. 4:15-22 |
— |
Legend: ✓ full disclosure, ~ partial, — absent. Always include citation location.
4. Combination Analysis
For each potentially obvious combination:
- References combined — which refs
- Motivation to combine — analogous art rationale, explicit suggestions, design incentives
- Missing elements — what remains undisclosed even in combination
5. Timeline
Chronological list by effective date, noting critical date boundaries (priority, filing, publication dates).
Guardrails
- Cite precisely — every factual assertion needs ¶, col:line, page, or figure number
- No legal conclusions — organize facts for attorney judgment; never state claims are anticipated or obvious
- Analogous art — flag references outside the immediate field with rationale for qualification
- Prior art status — note references whose qualification depends on date analysis (pre-AIA vs. AIA § 102) [VERIFY]
- Foreign-language refs — flag language, provide translated key passages, note if machine-translated
- Figures — describe depicted features with enough detail to be useful without viewing the original
- Terminology — define specialized terms on first use in brackets
- Order by relevance to claim elements; use chronological only if requested or analytically significant
1---2name: prior-art-summary3description: Generates structured summaries of prior art references for patent prosecution, validity analysis, and freedom-to-operate assessments. Maps disclosures to claim elements with precise citations. Use when summarizing prior art, analyzing patent landscapes, mapping references to claims, or preparing office action responses.4license: Apache-2.05---67# Prior Art Summary89Synthesizes prior art references into structured summaries mapping disclosures to claim elements for rapid landscape assessment.1011## Prerequisites1213- **Prior art references** — patents, applications, publications, product docs, or public disclosures14- **Invention description** — claims or specification under analysis15- **Scope directive** — prosecution, validity/invalidity, or FTO1617## Workflow1819### 1. Executive Overview2021Produce a table covering:2223- Total references reviewed (count)24- Most material references (top 3-5 with one-line rationale)25- Key gaps (claim elements with no or weak coverage)26- Art type breakdown (patents / applications / publications / other)2728### 2. Individual Reference Summaries2930For each reference:3132| Field | Content |33|-------|---------|34| Document ID | Patent/pub number, DOI, or identifier |35| Title | Full title |36| Date | Pub/issue date; note effective prior art date if different |37| Inventor(s)/Author(s) | Names |38| Technical field | CPC/IPC classes or subject domain |39| Assignee/Publisher | Entity |4041Then include:4243- **Disclosure summary** — 2-4 sentences on core technical contribution44- **Key features** — bulleted list with exact quoted language and precise citation (¶, col:line, page, figure)45- **Gaps** — what the reference does NOT disclose relative to the invention4647### 3. Claim-Element Mapping4849| Claim Element | Ref. 1 | Ref. 2 | Ref. 3 |50|--------------|--------|--------|--------|51| Element A | ¶[0032], Fig. 3 | — | p. 12 |52| Element B | — | Col. 4:15-22 | — |5354Legend: `✓` full disclosure, `~` partial, `—` absent. Always include citation location.5556### 4. Combination Analysis5758For each potentially obvious combination:5960- **References combined** — which refs61- **Motivation to combine** — analogous art rationale, explicit suggestions, design incentives62- **Missing elements** — what remains undisclosed even in combination6364### 5. Timeline6566Chronological list by effective date, noting critical date boundaries (priority, filing, publication dates).6768## Guardrails6970- **Cite precisely** — every factual assertion needs ¶, col:line, page, or figure number71- **No legal conclusions** — organize facts for attorney judgment; never state claims are anticipated or obvious72- **Analogous art** — flag references outside the immediate field with rationale for qualification73- **Prior art status** — note references whose qualification depends on date analysis (pre-AIA vs. AIA § 102) [VERIFY]74- **Foreign-language refs** — flag language, provide translated key passages, note if machine-translated75- **Figures** — describe depicted features with enough detail to be useful without viewing the original76- **Terminology** — define specialized terms on first use in brackets77- **Order by relevance** to claim elements; use chronological only if requested or analytically significant
ThomasMoreAI