Traverse reads the office action, finds what comparable applications actually did, and drafts the response — for the USPTO, the EPO, the UKIPO and the Indian Patent Office.
// For patent attorneys and agents · Four offices in depth · You review and file
The best answer to this office action is probably in a file you already have.
Someone at the firm has answered a rejection like this one. They know which argument the examiner accepted and which amendment cost the client a claim. That knowledge sits in closed files, and the associate with a response due on Friday cannot reach it.
Enter the application number, or upload the office action for offices we cannot fetch from.
The objections, the cited art and the claims are shown as extracted, and you correct anything it got wrong before it drafts.
The step that earns the trustAmend, argue, or both — each shown with what comparable cases did and how they ended.
A formatted response, with the claim listing marked and every ground answered.
The amendment above is a diff of the applicant's own claim, and the passage under it is where the specification supports it. Both are produced before the argument is written, because an amendment nothing in the disclosure supports is not an amendment worth arguing.
Four offices are supported with their own law, their own drafting conventions and their own body of prosecution history. Each is a separate workflow, because an EPO communication and a USPTO office action are not the same document and do not respond to the same arguments.
| Office | Status | What is supported |
|---|---|---|
| USPTO | Full | Live file retrieval, guided response workflow, formatted letter, pre-filing review, examiner and portfolio analytics, MPEP reference. |
| EPO | Full | Communication handling, guided response, EPO Guidelines reference, prosecution analytics. |
| UKIPO | Full | Examination report handling, guided response, file retrieval, UKIPO practice reference, prosecution analytics. |
| Indian Patent Office | Full | Examination report handling, guided response, hearing support, file retrieval, practice reference, prosecution analytics. |
| Other offices | Pilot | Upload-based workflow for offices whose law is not held. Produces a reply where the document is in English, and a technical brief for local counsel where it is not. |
Coverage is licensed per office. The table describes what the platform supports, not what every account includes.
Not a response period, not a bar date, not co-pendency. Dates are quoted from the office's own document and marked for you to confirm.
A reference to a prior case that cannot be traced to a real prosecution round in the retrieval set is discarded before you see it.
A field the office did not supply is marked [ATTORNEY TO VERIFY], and an objection your chosen approach does not answer is flagged in the letter rather than left out of it.
Bring a real office action.
We will run it in front of you, on your case, and you can judge the output against what you would have written.
Book a walkthrough ↗