Report:MicroPatent PatentWeb/Search Interface/The Search Forms

The Search Form

Unlike many of its competitors, MicroPatent offers only a web interface search form; it does not provide a command line interface. Notably, the web search form permits more complex query construction than most.

The search form.

Keyword Search: The search form accommodates both simple and complex queries, including long keyword queries. The form contains a large text box, designed for the construction of nested search strings and complex Boolean logic. The form also allows queries to be limited via a number of other parameters, via three additional search fields below this text box.

Data Coverage: The collections of interest, which are separated both by country and by document kind, are selected prior to running the search via a check-box menu appearing at the top of the interface. Default selections can be pre-set from the preferences page.

Years of Search: For all queries, the “years of search” must be chosen from another drop-down menu (this must be done even if a specific date range will be entered using one of the date parameter limiters available via three additional drop-down menus discussed below). The system offers these pre-defined date ranges mostly for convenience.

Text to Search: If a text search query is constructed, users choose from a drop-down list to select which portions of the patent documents should be queried. The list includes the options: Full patent spec; Claims, Title and Abstract; Claims; Title and Abstract; or English Title.

Other Limiters: Up to three drop-down menus can be used to select a complex combination of limiting parameters, including date, classification, or assignee search terms. Boolean logic may also be used within these fields: for example, a long list of allowed IPC classes may be separated by the “or” operator.

Below is a complete list of data fields that can be searched selectively via the PatSearch interface.

General Notes: The default operator for all of these fields is AND if multiple terms are entered. Also, many of these fields require the use of a special date or classification format in order for the search to work correctly; immediate help for the user can be obtained by simply clicking the “?” link to the right of the dropdown menu, which brings up the use help guide for that particular data field.

• Any Classification
  
  

Notes: This field is a time-saving amalgam of several data fields; entering any combination of ECLA, US, and/ or IPC classes together is allowed.

• Current IPC-R
  
  

Notes: Special formatting, or place-marking in the form of multiple zeros, must be applied between the subclass and main group of an IPC class when searching in MicroPatent. This system is confusing and not very intuitive; it must be an artifact of how MicroPatent has constructed their database, as other search engines have not felt the need to implement it. New users will need to reference the online help guide when attempting it.

The user can search in any IPC-R class, subclass or main group in MicroPatent without having to use truncation (*).

An ingenious space-saver, the “assisted search feature,” becomes available once the IPC-R field is selected to help the user designate which types of class designation (Advanced, Core, Subclass, and/or Invention only) of the IPC-R classifications should be searched. Click for more information on IPC Reform.

The assist feature helps users search the desired IPC-Reform classifications.

The assist feature helps users narrow their search by filtering the results to only those with Core, Advanced, or Subclass IPC designations for the given IPC mark; users may also eliminate any documents having a non-inventive IPC classification by selecting the "invention-only" option. (There is no way to limit a search to just documents with the IPC mark in a non-inventive capacity, but that strategy would seldom be needed in a prior art search.)

• Current US Class
  
  

Notes: US classes also require some re-formatting in MicroPatent; this mainly comprises adding zeros as place-markers for single or double digit class numbers. This re-formatting need is common in search engines, as US class and subclasses can have varying numbers of digits. A list of examples is available through the MicroPatent help guide.

Searches can be conducted on complete US class (including zeros as place-markers, i.e. class 2 is entered as 002), without truncation.

• ECLA
• Assignee or Applicant
• Assignee or Applicant (non-std)
• Inventor(s)
• Patent or Publication Number
• Application Number
• Filing Date
• Issue or Publication Date
• Priority date (earliest)
  
  

Notes: This field was designed to help users accurately search within priority date information when multiple priorities exist. Often, patent documents have multiple priority dates as a result of continuation and divisional applications, and although each of the priority dates may be significant when looking at individual patent documents, searching against multiple priority dates can give unwanted results. This field was created to enable consistent results, based only on earliest priority dates.

• Related US Applications
• Patents Cited (included with US, EP, WO, GB, DE records; as of May 2007 updates included for some FR and JP records as well)
• Non-Patent Citations (as of May 2007, should be included for all document types)
  
  

Notes: The text of non-patent citations is NOT part of the searchable full text for the patent record. If a search term exists only in the non-patent citation section, it will not be found by a normal text query.

• PCT Application Number (US, EP, GB, DE-T, DE-U records only)
• PCT Publication Number
• PCT Publication Date
• Agent or Correspondent (US records only)
• Examiner (US records only)
• Designated States (EP and PCT records only)
• DE Translation of
• Reassignment (US records only)
• Oppositions (EP records only)
  
  

Notes: The last two fields, Reassignment and Oppositions data, became searchable fields in 2006, after a major data reload to the system. This data comes from national US and EPO sources of legal information (as opposed to the INPADOC legal status data), and they are not available in some comparable search systems.

Saving Searches: Once the user has constructed the desired query, there are a few options that allow the user to save queries to a selected history right from the main search page. Two fields at the bottom of the page prompt the user to select an existing search history to save the query and results, or to create a name for a new search history. (The default selection on the main search page is Temporary, which will put the query into a temporary storage space that is purged every 18 hours.)

Help/Other Menus: Finally, the upper right hand corner of the main search interface contains links to a help guide, data coverage information, interactive class schedules (some provided by various external sources like the USPTO), the user’s current search history, the complete list of various saved search histories, and the saved alerts page.

Editor's Note:

The PatSearch search form offers good flexibility, and probably all of the features that an advanced user would require on a regular basis. The form is also particularly well designed. Many other search providers offer search forms that are incredibly overwhelming, with numerous fields and options covering the page.

MicroPatent’s design is simple, but quite versatile. The three drop-down menus, combined with the text box, are more than adequate for most searching situations, especially after the addition of the “Any Classification” field, which allows users to string together multiple classifications from different schemes (US, IPC, ECLA) using Boolean logic.

A recent addition to the search form, the “assist” feature, helps users select the types of classifications they wish to selectively search under the new IPC-R definition features. This feature provides an intuitive interface for the user, and translates the input into a search command that can be understood by the system. Of all the various designs that have been introduced to accommodate IPC-R definitions, this is probably one of the most efficient.