Identifying Potentially Patentable IP:
Your Guide to Innovation Protection

Step 1: Establish an Internal Invention Disclosure Process

The process of identifying patentable inventions begins with creating a reliable channel for reporting them. A standardized invention disclosure form gives your team a structured way to document ideas, methods or new products as they arise. That form should collect details like the date of development, contributors, supporting documents and a description of the invention’s key features. 

Capturing this information early is critical. Without formal disclosure, the invention may not be properly evaluated or protected, increasing the risk of public disclosure or ownership disputes.

Step 2: Conduct Preliminary Patent Searches (Internal and External)

Once an invention is disclosed internally, the next step is conducting a preliminary patent search to assess its novelty. 

Just because an idea feels new inside your company does not mean it is new under patent law. For an invention to qualify for patent protection, it must never have been disclosed publicly anywhere in the world, a high bar that catches many founders off guard.

A preliminary patent search helps avoid spending time, money and legal resources on a patent application that may be blocked by prior art. This search can begin in-house by reviewing published patents, academic research and conference abstracts. Free tools like Google Patents, Espacenet or the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office database offer a starting point. Depending on the complexity of the invention, a patent attorney or patent search firm may need to conduct a deeper analysis to better determine the strength of the invention’s patent eligibility.

Step 3: Evaluate Patentability Criteria

After conducting a patent search, the next step is to evaluate whether the invention meets core patentability criteria. 

This is where the legal questions get sharper: does the invention truly stand out as novel under patent law? Would a skilled person in the relevant field see it as an inventive step or dismiss it as an obvious tweak? It’s about determining whether the invention crosses the legal threshold from “known” to “inventive.” Many founders discover at this stage that small differences may not be enough to support a patent application.

Founders must also ask whether the invention falls into excluded subject matter. Some discoveries, no matter how exciting, aren’t patentable under the law. A naturally occurring gene sequence or an isolated protein from the human body doesn’t qualify for patent protection because courts have held that naturally occurring substances, even when isolated, may not meet the statutory requirement for patent-eligible subject matter. Certain diagnostic methods may also be excluded, especially under European Patent Office rules, although the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office may allow them if structured strategically. 

In addition to novelty and subject matter eligibility, the invention must show utility. In the U.S., utility means the invention must serve a specific, credible and substantial purpose. Without a clear application, even a groundbreaking discovery may fall short of this requirement.

Step 4: Assess Commercial Value and Strategic Fit

Even after confirming that an invention meets novelty, inventive step, utility and subject matter requirements, you must pause before moving forward. 

A patent application is a business decision, not just a legal step. Filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing a patent demands time, money and attention. It’s critical to ask: Is this invention a building block for our key products? Does it protect something customers will pay for or something they won’t even notice? Will this patent block competitors in a way that matters to our market?

Assessing commercial value forces founders to match legal rights with business realities. Does the patent create a competitive advantage by controlling a critical feature or method? Will it strengthen licensing prospects or help negotiate partnerships? Or is it covering something that won’t impact competitors or market access? 

A strategically weak patent drains resources without delivering protection where the company needs it most. You should evaluate whether the invention supports the business’s platform, aligns with its therapeutic focus and positions it for meaningful market protection.

Step 5: Map Jurisdictions and Filing Strategy

A patent is territorial, meaning you only gain protection in countries where you file and have the patent granted. This makes jurisdiction mapping a vital step. 

Where are your customers? Where do competitors pose the greatest threat? Where will manufacturing, distribution or licensing happen? By answering these questions, you’ll build a filing map that reflects your invention’s business path, not just its technical merits.

Once the jurisdictions are clear, you need to determine the filing strategy that fits. Should you start with a provisional patent application in the U.S. to secure a priority date at low cost? Would a Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”) application help keep international options open while delaying country-specific filings? Or is it time to file directly in countries that matter most? Each choice has implications for budget, flexibility and enforcement down the road.

Step 6: Document Contributions and Inventorship

Under patent law, an inventor is not simply anyone involved in the project. 

An inventor is someone who contributed to the conception of at least one claim in the patent application. A collaborator, by contrast, might support experiments, conduct research or test a new product without qualifying as an inventor under legal standards. It’s an important distinction that can be easy to miss in the fast-moving environment of life sciences and other technology companies.

This step is about protecting the company’s IP by creating a clear record of who contributed what. Without solid documentation, disputes over inventorship can arise later, jeopardizing the patent’s enforceability or even leading to invalidation. If someone who should have been named was left off, that individual could challenge the patent. 

Conversely, naming someone who did not contribute to a claimed invention may also cause legal issues. By tracking contributions early and comparing them to the claims that emerge, founders place the company in the best position to secure patent protection without unnecessary risk.

Step 7: Develop Protocols for Confidentiality and Nondisclosure

A key challenge for life sciences and other technology companies is controlling disclosures before a patent application is filed. 

Under patent law, even a seemingly harmless presentation or publication can count as a public disclosure, potentially destroying novelty. The U.S. offers a one-year grace period, but most industrialized countries do not. This means protecting patent rights requires proactive confidentiality measures from day one.

You need clear internal protocols. Train your team so they understand what must stay confidential and when to involve legal counsel before sharing information. Review all documents, abstracts or slides before they leave the company. 

Check that nondisclosure agreements are signed with investors, vendors or collaborators before sharing technical details. A small oversight now could undermine patent protection later. Building this discipline early helps support both your patent strategy and broader intellectual property goals.

Step 8: Track Timelines and Deadlines

Deadlines in patent law are not forgiving. 

If you filed a provisional patent application, you face a firm 12-month window to convert it into a non-provisional application. Once that window closes, the priority date is lost, even if the invention remains novel or technically impressive. Every founder should treat this deadline as a cornerstone of the filing strategy.

At the same time, other deadlines move in parallel. Planning to present at a conference or publish research? Those dates need to be flagged ahead of time since public disclosure could count as prior art against your own patent application in most countries. Founders relying on a PCT application must also carefully track national-phase deadlines. A well-maintained timeline avoids costly mistakes and helps align your patent application process with broader intellectual property strategies.