Skip to main content

Feature List

Everything Evalify does today, grouped by what you're trying to accomplish. For what changed and when, see What's New; for how the analysis is produced, see the Analysis Methodology.

note

Evalify offers two analysis types — Standard and Counsel Grade. The list below reflects the full Counsel Grade set, the most comprehensive tier; Standard exposes a curated subset. Some capabilities (Review Mode, and jurisdiction-aware clearance at the depth described) are Counsel-Grade features.

Search & screening​

  • Autonomous, context-driven search. Evalify reads the invention, infers its technical context, and runs the whole patent search end to end — no manual query building.
  • Technical-aspect decomposition. The product is broken into its distinct patentable technical aspects, so each is searched and assessed on its own.
  • Editable search strategy. Review and adjust the aspects and search framing before the analysis runs.
  • Maximum, licensed coverage. A wide, defensible net across a global patent corpus, tuned to minimise missed art.
  • Guaranteed per-office search. Every selected jurisdiction gets its own dedicated search, so a market is only ever reported clear because it was searched — improving coverage of non-English art (such as Japanese patents) and each office's utility models.
  • Non-patent literature. Prior-art / invalidity evidence from open scholarly sources — academic literature (OpenAlex), preprints (arXiv), biomedical literature (PubMed), and internet standards (IETF).
  • Any-language analysis. Inventions and patents in any language are normalised into one working language and delivered in English.

FTO opinion & score​

  • Element-by-element claim charts. A limitation-by-limitation chart for each aspect against the relevant claims — the all-elements analysis at the heart of an infringement read, with a verdict per element.
  • Written FTO opinion & a single score. A freedom-to-operate opinion plus one clearance Score, grounded in the deterministic claim-chart verdicts (not a black-box similarity number).
  • Clearance confidence. A High / Medium / Low read on how well-supported the position is, blending how thoroughly the subject matter was charted with how decisively it cleared.
  • Legal-status-weighted risk. Each reference's current legal status (in force / lapsed / expired / abandoned / pending), assignee, family context, and estimated term — so risk is weighted by enforceability, and pending applications are treated as future risk, not current blockers.
  • Quality Cross-check. An independent second AI, from a different provider, stress-tests each cleared claim from the patent owner's side; material disagreements surface as review-only, threat-rated exposures — never overriding or contradicting the primary chart.
  • Courses of action. Per-blocker mitigation options — design-around, licence, validity challenge, await expiry, and others.
  • Adjacent opportunities. Related applications and markets where the same subject matter would encounter more freedom.
  • Interactive assistant. A chat expert grounded in your specific analysis — every patent, score and decision — to interrogate any result in context.

Jurisdiction-aware clearance​

  • Per-office clearance verdicts. A computed clearance verdict — Clear, At risk (conditional), or Critical (blocked) — for each searched jurisdiction, derived from the same claim-chart rules as the overall opinion, and stated as searched.
  • Conditional (localized-block) opinion. A block in one market with clearance in the others reads as a Conditional FTO — naming the blocked and the clear markets and the redesign / market- avoidance path — rather than a false global block.
  • Jurisdiction-aware score. A localized block softens the score in proportion to how much of the searched scope is clear (never reaching full green while any market is blocked); pending applications pull it toward caution.
  • Clearance map & jurisdiction chips. The map colours each office by its computed verdict and shows out-of-scope offices as Not Searched, alongside chips for the offices covered, utility-model coverage, and data-coverage notes.
  • Weighting that matches the law. Only granted patents block; pending applications only monitor; and utility models — a materially weaker right — never hard-block a product (at most conditional).

See Clearance by Jurisdiction for the walkthrough.

Review & edit​

  • Review Mode — a word processor for your opinion. Open a completed analysis as one continuous, editable document and turn the draft into your own filed opinion, editing prose and structured findings in place. Read-only until you enter it.
  • Attorney-editable everything. Edit the FTO opinion, claim-element verdicts, product mappings, per-chart summaries, element notes, and which aspects are included — directly.
  • Rich text throughout. Bold, italic, underline and links across every editable field, through one shared formatting toolbar; formatting persists into the report and the exported PDF.
  • Live re-scoring — nothing to submit. A verdict change or an aspect exclusion re-derives the Score, verdict and opinion automatically, and the write-up regenerates to match your edits.
  • Durable, undoable edits. Every edit survives a re-run and re-attaches to the analysis, with session-wide undo / redo; your manual wording always wins over the AI's, with one-click revert.
  • Stale-opinion flagging. If a later verdict change moves the conclusion your edited opinion was written against, it's flagged "May be out of date" with a one-click revert to the AI opinion.

See Review Mode for the walkthrough.

Export & reports​

  • WYSIWYG export composer. Compose the exact document in a live, real-PDF preview before you generate it — the preview is the actual file, page for page.
  • Export on every plan. Standard exports the visual FTO Brief as a PDF; Counsel Grade exports both the FTO Brief and the full report, each as a PDF or an editable Word (.docx).
  • One master, many renditions. A full A4 report, a visual FTO Brief, or cover-email text — all from the same edited analysis.
  • Redesigned visual FTO Brief. A picture-first executive brief: score gauge, band-coloured opinion, claim-chart overview, jurisdiction-clearance chips, a critical-patent spotlight with the patent's real drawing, and pending-application monitoring.
  • Section control. Include / exclude sections, drag to reorder them, and push any into an appendix.
  • Cover, header, footer & disclaimer. Editable cover fields, running header and footer, and a disclaimer paragraph you tailor per export.
  • Saved export presets. Save your firm's setup — branding, disclaimer, fonts, layout — as a reusable default that auto-applies.
  • Firm branding. Your reports and workspace carry your firm's fonts and logo.
  • Private & self-hosted rendering. PDFs and editable Word (.docx) files are generated inside Evalify's own infrastructure, so an analysis never leaves it.
  • Supporting sections. Patents and utility models assessed, patent-classification overview with authoritative WIPO subclass names, patent & product landscape, and competitors & market players.
  • Video Brief. A short (~60–80s) narrated, brand-consistent video summary of each analysis — verdict, key findings, and where the exposure sits — watchable in-app and shareable to a client via a branded link. Auto-generated on Counsel Grade; generated on demand from a button on Standard. See Video Brief.

See Exporting & Sharing for the walkthrough.

Monitoring​

  • Ongoing monitoring. Place a completed analysis under monitoring so it is re-checked on a schedule and you're alerted to concrete legal events against the matter.
  • Legal-event alerts. A new relevant patent publishing, a pending patent granting (with its now-enforceable claims surfaced), or a blocker lapsing or expiring — with the events that raise an alert under your control.
  • Track specific patents. Name individual patents to watch, alongside the automatically monitored set.
  • Self-updating analysis. When a change is found, Evalify folds it in and re-runs the AI — a newly-granted patent is claim-charted and your score & FTO opinion re-derive, the write-up is rewritten to match. Included in the subscription; every auto-update raises a review flag for you.
  • Claims-pending auto-charting. A very recent grant that's chart-worthy but whose claim text isn't published yet is flagged "granted, claims pending" and held out of the charted set — never given a clear or blocked verdict — then charted automatically the moment its claims appear, folded into a new version with your score & opinion re-derived.
  • Version history — original never overwritten. The assessment as first delivered is frozen and always one click away via a version switcher (Original ⇄ Current); exports print whichever version you're viewing.
  • Notification centre. A nav bell with an unread count and a Notifications page listing every detected change across all your monitored analyses, plus a "Changes" panel on the analysis itself.

See Monitoring for the full picture.

Plans & billing​

  • Bulk credits & pay-by-invoice. Eligible business accounts can buy analysis credits in bulk and pay by a net-terms invoice — card, bank transfer, or ACH — instead of an instant card charge, with credits added once the invoice is paid. See Plans & Billing.
Reliance

Evalify produces an analytical work-product to inform your assessment — not an opinion of counsel, and not legal advice. The professional opinion, and the judgment behind it, remain yours. See the FAQs.

Deeper discovery & clearance guards​

Counsel-Grade passes that widen recall beyond the initial ranking and pressure-test every clearance.

  • Citation-based discovery (forward citations). For the strongest identified blockers, Evalify follows their forward citations — the later patents that cite them — and charts those element-by-element like any other reference. A recall step that surfaces adjacent art an initial relevance ranking may have under-weighted; each pulled-in reference is charted objectively, so an off-target citation simply charts clear. Shown with a Forward citation provenance badge.
  • Competitor / assignee forced search. Force Evalify to retrieve and chart a named competitor's on-topic patents regardless of the relevance ranking, via Expand to competitor. It intersects the competitor's ownership with the aspect's technical scope — only on-topic art, not the whole portfolio — and charts the forced references objectively; forcing retrieval never forces a finding.
  • Prior art cited against the patent (invalidity evidence). For confirmed blockers, Evalify retrieves the references the patent office cited against that patent during prosecution — including examiner-classified citations: X (novelty on its own), Y (obviousness in combination), and A (technological background) — plus the examiner-cited literature. Presented as invalidity evidence that grounds the Challenge Validity course of action in real references. Strictly advisory — it never changes the FTO score or verdict.
  • Adversarial claim construction. Evalify stress-tests thin Clear verdicts by reading each claim the broadest way a patent owner's litigator would assert it — broadest-reasonable construction plus the doctrine of equivalents. Where a clearance rests on a single absent limitation and a high-threat exposure credibly attacks that last barrier, the verdict is pulled from Clear to Conditional.