| name | patent-infringement-analysis |
| title | Patent Infringement Analysis |
| description | Generates a structured patent infringement analysis mapping claims to accused product features via claim charts. Covers Phillips claim construction, literal infringement, doctrine of equivalents, validity defenses, damages, and strategic recommendations. Use when analyzing patent infringement, preparing claim charts, evaluating IP litigation risk, or assessing licensing and design-around options. |
| author | CaseMark |
| author_url | https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/patent-infringement-analysis |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| version | 0.1.0 |
| execution_mode | open |
| jurisdiction | us |
| practice | ip |
| language | en |
Patent Infringement Analysis
Produces a report evaluating whether an accused product or process infringes asserted patent claims, for litigation counsel, in-house teams, or technical experts.
Prerequisites
Gather before starting:
- Asserted patent(s) — specification, claims, file history, prosecution docs, amendments, office action responses
- Accused product/process — specs, manuals, marketing materials, drawings, schematics, source code, reverse engineering reports
- Prior art — patents, publications, technical standards relevant to the technology
- Asserted claims identified — which independent and dependent claims are at issue
Report Structure
1. Executive Summary
| Element | Content |
|---|
| Overall conclusion | Qualified: "strong likelihood," "probable," "unlikely," or "no infringement" |
| Per-claim assessment | Bottom-line for each independent claim and key dependents |
| Recommendations | Cease / license / litigate / design-around / post-grant proceedings |
| Critical risks | Willfulness exposure, SOL deadlines, related litigation |
| Key uncertainties | Ambiguous terms, missing technical info, unsettled legal questions |
2. Patent Overview
- Bibliographic data — number, title, dates (issue/filing/priority), inventors, assignee, family
- Technical field — problem, inventive concept, advantages over prior art
- Prosecution highlights — amendments, narrowing arguments, disclaimer/estoppel, canceled claims
- Asserted claims — dependency relationships, selection rationale
- Patent status — litigation history, post-grant proceedings, terminal disclaimers
3. Claim Construction
Apply Phillips v. AWH Corp. framework for each disputed term:
| Source | Analysis |
|---|
| Claim language | Ordinary meaning to POSITA; context from surrounding claims |
| Specification | Definitions, "as used herein," lexicography, consistent usage |
| Prosecution history |
