Patents

Fetch a single USPTO patent application/grant by application number (`number`, e.g. "16/123,456" or "16123456") or by an already-granted patent number (`patent_number`, e.g. "11646472") — pass whichever one you actually have. Returns full metadata: title, inventors, classifications, status, and — when the application has been granted — `patent_number`, `grant_date`, `publication_number`, `publication_date`. **8-digit application numbers and 8-digit patent numbers can be the SAME digit string for a different record** (application series codes 10-12 were used ~2003-2008, and granted patent numbers entered that same 10,000,000-12,999,999 range in 2018 and are still in it) — e.g. "11646472" is BOTH application 11/646,472 (a 2006 filing) AND patent 11,646,472 (a 2023 grant), two unrelated inventions. If you only pass `number` and it is an 8-digit value in that collision range, this tool checks BOTH interpretations; if both exist, it returns `ambiguous: true` with each record summarized rather than silently guessing — re-call with `number` for the application or `patent_number` for the patent. Passing `patent_number` explicitly always skips the ambiguity check. A `status` of "Patented Case" with `patent_number: null` means USPTO ODP omitted that field for this record (check `patent_number_warning`), not that the patent was never granted; a pending application correctly has `patent_number: null`, `grant_date: null`.

Retrieve USPTO-recorded assignment/conveyance history for one patent application from the migrated Open Data Portal endpoint. Returns assignors, assignees, execution/recording dates, conveyance text, and reel/frame. A recorded assignment is notice of a submitted instrument—not a legal opinion on present title, validity, scope, liens, or chain-of-title completeness.

Fetch the parent/child continuity (priority) chain for one patent application — every earlier application this one claims priority from (continuation, divisional, CIP, provisional, etc.) and every later application that in turn claims priority from it, each with the claim type, dates, and the parent/child's own patent number where granted. Use this to answer "what did this patent come from" or "what later patents/applications descend from this one". An application with no continuity relationships returns an empty chain on both sides — that is a real, common answer (most applications are standalone filings), not a failure.

Fetch the full USPTO prosecution/transaction history for one patent application — every dated event the Office recorded against the case (filings, mailings, fee payments, office actions, notices, the grant itself), newest first. This is a superset of the handful of events `get_patent` surfaces: use this tool when the question is about the PROSECUTION HISTORY itself (how many office actions, when was it mailed, when did examination start) rather than just the current status.

Search USPTO patent applications by inventor last name. Returns matching applications with title, inventor list, and filing date — sorted newest-filed-first, so this is the APPLICATION corpus (same as search_patents with no `granted_after`), and the newest rows will be unexamined filings with no grant date by construction (USPTO publishes ~18 months after filing). That is expected, not stale data. For a specific inventor's ISSUED patents, use search_patents with `inventor` + `granted_after` instead.

Search USPTO-recorded patent assignment/conveyance history by assignee, assignor, a granted patent number, or an application number — one of the four is required. Unlike `get_patent_assignments` (which needs an application number you already have), this answers "what has company X been assigned" or "who assigned patent Y". An `assignee`/`assignor` search returns one row per recorded assignment (reel/frame, conveyance, dates, the other party) and additionally resolves the covered property (application/patent number, title) for each one it returns via a follow-up lookup — capped by `limit` because each one is a separate upstream call. A `patent_number`/`application_number` search returns the full assignment chain for that one property directly. An assignee/assignor with no recorded assignments returns a plain zero with the upstream total, not an error — USPTO assignment coverage is uneven for older or never-assigned properties. Individual (non-corporate) assignee addresses are omitted; company addresses are kept. Powered by the USPTO Assignment Search system (public, no account or key required).

Search USPTO patent applications and grants — **without a `granted_after`/`granted_before` bound this returns the APPLICATION corpus sorted newest-FILED-first, not issued patents.** USPTO publishes an application ~18 months after filing and typically takes 2+ years to grant it, so the newest rows in an unfiltered search are always recent, unexamined filings with `grant_date: null` — that is expected, not stale data. **Pick the date field on the QUESTION'S VERB, not on the word "recent":** a question asking who has FILED / applied for / sought patents in a window wants `filed_after`/`filed_before` — the default application corpus already includes pending AND granted patents, so no `granted_after` is needed or wanted, and adding one will silently drop recently-filed-but-not-yet-examined applications (grant lags filing by 2+ years, so "filed in the last 3 years" AND "granted in the last 3 years" are mostly DISJOINT sets). Only use `granted_after`/`granted_before` when the question explicitly says GRANTED / ISSUED / APPROVED / "has a patent" (not just "recent patents"). Use `query` for free-text keywords ("lithium battery", "crispr", "machine learning"); all terms are required (AND), and you can quote a phrase to keep it together. A curated, short list of known synonym/abbreviation pairs for concepts that patents describe inconsistently (e.g. cfRNA / cell-free RNA / circulating RNA; MRD / minimal residual disease / residual cancer) is recognized in `query` — quoted or bare — and expanded to an OR group before the search runs, so "cfRNA" and "cell-free RNA" are treated as the same concept rather than requiring the caller to guess a specific patent's exact wording (marked `synonyms_expanded: true` in the response; this is a fixed, documented list, not general synonym invention). A question that names several DISTINCT ways of describing the same idea (e.g. a condition plus a detection method, each expressed as its own quoted phrase) should still be passed as one query — i…