CSEG3060 · Research Methodology in Computer Science
Patent literature · IPC and CPC classification · the major databases and how to search them · and how the patent system is actually run
Roughly 70% of the world’s technical information is disclosed only in patent documents, and never published anywhere else.
Unit VI · Lecture 3 of 4 · 60 minutes · CO4 · B.Tech (CSE) Semester V
Dr. Mohsin Furkh Dar · School of Computer Science, UPES
→ / Space next · ← back · O overview · N speaker notes · F full screen
Learning outcomes · CO4
Identify the components of a patent document and read a front page using INID codes
Explain the IPC hierarchy and decode a classification such as G06F 21/62
Distinguish CPC from IPC, and name the CPC codes covering your own research area
Navigate PATENTSCOPE, USPTO, Espacenet and IPAIRS, and choose the right one for a given task
Formulate a search combining classification codes, keywords and Boolean syntax
Describe the three tiers of patent administration, the prosecution workflow, and recent reforms
Patent literature · 1 of 2
| Bibliographic data | Number, date, country, applicant, inventor, classification codes |
| Abstract | Concise technical summary |
| Description | Full disclosure enabling a person skilled in the art to reproduce it |
| Claims | The legally enforceable statements defining scope |
| Drawings | Diagrams, flowcharts, schematics |
Primary — applications and granted patents published by the offices.
Secondary — search reports, examination opinions, gazettes, classifications, abstracting services.
A1 application published with a search report · A2 application published without one · B1 granted patent with no prior application publication · B2 granted patent where the application was already published
Utility models — shorter-term protection for incremental innovation, common in Germany and China. They are prior art too.
Patent literature · 2 of 2
Has the algorithm or architecture already been patented, before you file?
Which patents might your planned commercial product infringe?
Mapping innovation trends in ML, blockchain, quantum computing, cybersecurity.
Tracking how patented technologies build on earlier scientific work.
Identifying patent holders open to a licensing arrangement.
(10) Document identification — patent number, kind code
(20) Application data — number, filing date
(30) Priority data — earlier applications under the Paris Convention
(40) Publication date
(50) Technical information — IPC/CPC classification, title, abstract
(60) References — related applications
(70) Identification of parties — applicant, inventor, assignee, agent
Classification · 1 of 4
G06F 21/62G — Section: Physics
G06 — Class: Computing; calculating; counting
G06F — Subclass: Electric digital data processing
G06F 21 — Group: Security arrangements for protecting computers, components, programs or data against unauthorised activity
G06F 21/62 — Subgroup: Protecting access to data via a platform, e.g. using keys or access control rules
The version number is appended to indicate the edition used — for example IPC 2025.01. Most computer science patents fall in Section G (Physics) and Section H (Electricity).
Classification · 2 of 4
| Section | Title | Domain |
|---|---|---|
| A | Human necessities | Agriculture, food, health, personal items |
| B | Performing operations; transporting | Industrial processes, transport |
| C | Chemistry; metallurgy | Chemical engineering |
| D | Textiles; paper | Textile and paper industries |
| E | Fixed constructions | Buildings, mining |
| F | Mechanical engineering | Engines, pumps, lighting, heating |
| G | Physics | Instruments, computing, optics, nuclear engineering |
| H | Electricity | Electric power, electronics, communication |
Classification · 3 of 4
G06N 3/04 | Neural network architectures |
G06N 3/08 | Learning methods for neural networks |
H04L 9/00 | Cryptographic mechanisms |
H04L 9/06 | Block cipher systems |
G06F 16/00 | Information retrieval; database structures |
G06T 7/00 | Image analysis |
G10L 15/22 | Speech recognition procedures |
G06Q 50/18 | Legal services — including IPR itself |
Find the two or three codes covering your own project and note them now — they are the entry point for every search in the second half of this lecture.
Classification · 4 of 4
WIPO and many national offices — including IP India — still index primarily by IPC.
Both use CPC extensively. If you search only by IPC on Espacenet you are discarding the finer granularity.
The additional granularity of CPC allows far more precise searches in cutting-edge technologies — which is exactly where a CS researcher works.
USPC
United States Patent Classification — used by the USPTO until 2015, when CPC fully replaced it. You will still meet it on older documents.
FI and F-term
Japanese systems offering very fine subdivisions — valuable for electronics and imaging prior art.
DE
The German national scheme used by the DPMA.
Databases · 1 of 3
Covers: PCT international applications published 18 months after priority · national and regional collections from over 100 offices · non-patent literature cited in search reports.
Key features: Cross-lingual information retrieval (CLIR) searching several languages at once by semantic translation · Boolean, phrase and proximity syntax · citation extraction and chemical structure search · machine translation of full text via TAPTA · RSS alerts for new publications.
Strengths unmatched PCT and developing-country coverage; powerful translation. Limits variable OCR on older documents; some national collections lag.
| PatFT | Full-text US granted patents, 1976 onward |
| AppFT | Published US applications |
| Patent Center | The unified portal replacing legacy PAIR and EFOAS |
Search modes: quick two-field query · advanced Boolean across title, abstract, claims, inventor, assignee and classification · CPC classification browse.
Strengths authoritative for US filings; rich legal-status data; Patent Center gives full prosecution histories — office actions and responses. Limits US only; pre-1976 patents are image-only.
Databases · 2 of 3
Free access to over 140 million patent documents from more than 100 countries.
Smart search for natural-language queries · advanced search across IPC, CPC, applicant, inventor, date range and priority number · interactive CPC/IPC browser · citation graph and INPADOC legal events, visualising family relationships and prosecution history across jurisdictions · Patent Translate supporting 32+ languages · Open Patent Services (OPS), a REST API for bulk retrieval, heavily used in patent analytics.
Strengths best-in-class global coverage, family and legal-event data. Limits some bulk-data features need a free EPO account.
Provided by the CGPDTM: the Indian Patent Information Retrieval System, with a public search portal.
Search by application number, patent number, title, abstract, claims, full text, inventor, applicant, and CPC.
Covers applications filed in India under the Patents Act, 1970, including PCT applications entering the Indian national phase. Status tracking across Filed, Published, Under Examination, Granted, Withdrawn, Abandoned, Revoked.
Strengths authoritative and current legal status for Indian filings. Limits less polished interface; variable OCR on older scans; English-only.
Databases · 3 of 3
| Feature | WIPO PATENTSCOPE | USPTO PatFT/AppFT | EPO Espacenet | IP India (IPAIRS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geographic scope | Global — PCT + national | USA only | Global | India only |
| Document count | 100+ million | 12+ million | 140+ million | ~700,000 published |
| Classification | IPC, CPC | CPC (formerly USPC) | CPC, IPC | IPC, CPC |
| Full-text search | Yes | Yes, 1976+ | Yes | Yes |
| Machine translation | Yes — TAPTA | Limited | Yes — Patent Translate | No |
| API access | Limited | Yes — Patent Center | Yes — OPS | No |
| Legal status data | Partial | Comprehensive | Excellent — INPADOC | Authoritative for India |
| Best for | PCT filings, global coverage | US prosecution history | Comprehensive prior-art searches | Indian filings |
Searching · 1 of 3
Define the technical subject with precision. Vague topics produce unusable result sets.
Combine keywords, classification codes and applicant filters.
Apply date ranges, jurisdictions and citation analysis.
| Strategy | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|
| Keyword search | Discovers synonyms and emerging terminology; intuitive | Misses translations and unusual phrasings; subject to noise |
| Classification search | Reliable across languages and synonyms; precise | Requires familiarity with IPC/CPC; may miss innovative cross-domain applications |
Searching · 2 of 3
AND, OR, NOT — standard operators
Quotation marks — exact phrase
Parentheses — nested grouping
Wildcards — typically * for zero or more characters, ? for a single character
Espacenet field syntax:
(cla = ("machine learning" OR "neural network")) AND ap = ("Google")Searches claims mentioning machine learning or neural networks, in patents assigned to Google.
1 · Identify the CPC codes
G06N 3/04, G06N 3/08 — neural networksH04L 63/00, H04L 63/14 — network securityG06F 21/55 — malware detection
2 · Construct the query on Espacenet
CPC = (G06N3/04 OR G06N3/08) AND (H04L63/00 OR G06F21/55) Date range: last five years Jurisdiction: US, EP, WO3 · Refine with keywords such as “intrusion detection” or “anomaly detection” in title and abstract.
4 · Analyse — export bibliographic data, generate citation graphs, identify top assignees (Cisco, IBM, Palo Alto Networks), observe temporal trends.
Searching · 3 of 3
References cited by the patent. Useful for finding earlier art — the examiner and the applicant have already done part of your search for you.
Patents that later cite this one. Useful for assessing influence and mapping downstream innovation — a heavily forward-cited patent is a foundational one.
The same invention filed in multiple jurisdictions. Useful for understanding a competitor’s global protection strategy and for identifying every relevant legal event.
Since Vaswani et al., Attention Is All You Need (2017), transformers have reshaped natural language processing. A landscape study reveals the commercial dimension of that academic breakthrough.
Databases: Espacenet and PATENTSCOPE. Query:
CPC = (G06N3/045 OR G06N3/0464 OR G06N3/0455) AND title/abstract = ("attention mechanism" OR "transformer" OR "self-attention")Part 2 begins
The first half of this lecture was about finding patents. The second half is about the institutions that create them — how an application is prosecuted, what happens after grant, and how the system has been reformed over the past two decades.
National patent offices
Examine applications under domestic law
Regional systems
Consolidate filing for groups of countries
International coordination
Treaty secretariat and standard-setter
The distinction that matters: Tiers 1 and 2 grant patents. Tier 3 does not. WIPO administers treaties and sets standards, but it has never granted a patent in its life — which is the same point made about the PCT in Unit V.
Administration · 1 of 3
USPTO — the largest national office by volume
EPO — supranational, examining under the EPC for contracting states
JPO — Japan
CNIPA — China, the fastest-growing filer globally
KIPO — Korea
IPO India — operating through four regional offices at Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata under the Patents Act, 1970
Consolidate filing procedures for groups of countries:
EAPO — Eurasian Patent Organization
ARIPO — African Regional Intellectual Property Organization
OAPI — African Intellectual Property Organization
EPO — acting as a regional grant body
WIPO, headquartered in Geneva, administers the PCT, the Madrid System for marks and the Hague System for designs.
WIPO functions as a treaty secretariat and normative standard-setter — not a granting authority.
Administration · 2 of 3
Specification, claims, abstract and drawings, to the office of first filing.
Verification of administrative requirements.
Identification of prior art; produces the search report.
Assessment against the patentability criteria.
Exchanges between examiner and applicant, usually involving claim amendments.
The culminating decision. Refusals may be appealed.
N novelty · IS inventive step (non-obviousness) · IA industrial applicability (utility) · SD sufficient disclosure. Each condition must be independently satisfied — which is what a conjunction means, and why examiners attack whichever is weakest.
Renewal and annuity payments, escalating over the 20-year term · opposition under Art. 99 EPC or s.25 of the Indian Act · invalidation and revocation · licensing registers · patent information and databases.
Administration · 3 of 3
USPTO Track One — prioritised examination under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, 2011, for an additional fee, targeting final disposition in 12 months.
Patent Prosecution Highway networks — bilateral agreements letting offices fast-track applications using a partner office’s work product, cutting duplication and search cost.
EPO “Raising the Bar” (post-2010) — tightened examination standards, expanded supplementary European search reports.
The most contested category. Computer programs as such were historically excluded in India (s.3(k)) and Europe (Art. 52 EPC) — but technical applications of software are routinely patentable.
USPTO Revised Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019, updated through 2024) — clarifies Alice/Mayo with worked examples in AI.
EPO Case Law Compendium — continuous refinement of “technical character”.
Indian CRI Guidelines (2018, 2024 drafts) — computer-related inventions patentable where they show a technical effect or advancement.
AI-assisted prior-art search — CNIPA and JPO have deployed ML tools to help examiners find documents.
SEPs and FRAND — India’s DPIIT issued a draft Standard Essential Patents Policy in 2021; the European Commission has advanced FRAND frameworks.
AI as inventor — the DABUS cases (Thaler v. Comptroller, EPO Boards of Appeal 2021–22; Thaler v. Vidal, US Federal Circuit 2022) rejected AI systems as inventors.
Digital — WIPO ePCT and the Digital Access Service; USPTO Patent Center replacing PAIR; EPO opposition by videoconference (2021); Indian Patents (Amendment) Rules 2020 and 2024.
Consolidation
Find the two or three CPC codes covering your group project. Run one Espacenet search combining them with a keyword. Note the top three assignees and whether anyone has already patented what you are building.
Espacenet for prior art · Patent Center for prosecution history · PATENTSCOPE for PCT and non-English filings · IPAIRS for Indian enforceability
Next — Lecture 4: IPR in Software, Institutions and the Courts: copyright against patent for software, licensing models and open source, institutional IP policy and technology transfer offices, and the landmark cases.