What “searching patents across countries” means

There are two related tasks, and choosing the right one prevents misleading results:

• Search across jurisdictions: find separate inventions or publications that match the same technical query in selected patent authorities.
• Trace one invention across jurisdictions: start with one publication and retrieve its simple or extended patent family.

This tutorial focuses on the second task. It is the faster route when you already know a relevant invention—or can find one—and want to see where corresponding applications have been published. For a landscape, novelty search, or freedom-to-operate project, expand the initial search to multiple results and define countries, dates, assignees, classifications, and claim concepts before screening.

Why use Patsnap Open for this search?

Cross-country family research depends on broad coverage and records that remain linked as you move from search to verification. Patsnap Open reports 210M+ patent records across 174 jurisdictions, with structured metadata and frequent updates. The Global Core Patent Database MCP server brings search, patent-family, bibliographic, claims, description, full-text, image, and legal-status tools into the same Claude conversation.

Patent queries may also contain commercially sensitive technical information. Patsnap maintains ISO 27001:2022 and SOC 2 Type 1 controls and does not use customer data to train AI models. Organizations should still apply their own access, confidentiality, and review policies.

These capabilities make the server a practical starting point for research and triage. They do not turn an MCP response into a legal conclusion: verify important family relationships, claims, and status events before using them in a business or legal decision.

1Connect the patent MCP server to your AI workflow

This tutorial demonstrates the workflow with AI, but Claude is not required. The same server can be used with other MCP-compatible clients; only the connection steps and interface may differ.

For clients that accept a remote MCP URL, copy the connector URL below and paste it into the client’s MCP server settings.

1. Sign in to Patsnap Open Platform and create an MCP Key.
2. Open the Global Core Patent Database server page.
3. Copy the connection configuration shown in the Connect panel.
4. Add the configuration to your AI assistant or coding agent or another MCP-compatible client, following the current client integration guide.
5. Restart or reconnect the client, then confirm that the patent search and patent-family tools are available.

The Starter plan currently includes 10,000 credits for initial evaluation. Plans, access, and credit consumption can change, so check the current pricing page before estimating a larger project.

2Ask your AI assistant or coding agent to find a relevant patent

Begin with a bounded technical question. Include the concept, the result fields you need, and the number of records to return. The example below uses a small result set so you can review relevance before expanding the search.

Use the connected Global Core Patent Database to search for patents related to “semaglutide GLP-1 receptor agonist.” Return the 5 most relevant results in a table with publication number, title, applicant or assignee, earliest priority date, publication date, and patent authority. Do not infer missing fields. Briefly explain why each result appears relevant.

Review the title, abstract, applicant, dates, and classifications before choosing a record. A semantic match can be useful for discovery, but it is not automatically the same invention, valid prior art for a particular date, or a potential infringement concern.

3Retrieve the patent family

After selecting a relevant publication, Ask your AI assistant or coding agent to use that publication number as the family lookup input. Request both the relationship and the source fields you will need to verify the result.

For publication EP4721726A1, retrieve the available simple family and extended family records. Group the results by patent authority. For each member, show the publication number, application number if available, publication date, applicant or assignee, and current simple legal status. Distinguish data returned by the tool from your interpretation.

In the worked example, the returned family data included publications associated with the European Patent Office, Japan, China, Korea, and the PCT route. Presenting the output by patent authority is clearer than calling every entry a “country”: the EPO is a regional authority, and a WO publication is an international PCT publication rather than a granted worldwide patent.

4Verify status and compare jurisdictions

Family retrieval is a map, not the end of the analysis. Continue with focused follow-ups:

• Retrieve the latest legal events for each publication you plan to rely on.
• Compare independent claims rather than assuming family members have the same scope.
• Check priority, filing, publication, grant, lapse, withdrawal, and expiry dates separately.
• Confirm important records in the relevant patent office register or another authoritative source.

Compare the independent claims of the EP, CN, JP, and KR family members. Identify substantive wording differences, but do not provide a legal conclusion. Cite each observation to the relevant publication number and state when full text or current status is unavailable.

For freedom-to-operate or validity decisions, involve a qualified patent professional. Automated family and status data supports research and triage; it does not replace jurisdiction-specific legal review.

How to improve the quality of the results

• Define the research date. State whether Claude should consider publications available before a particular cutoff.
• Separate discovery from verification. First find candidates; then retrieve family, claims, and legal events for selected records.
• Use patent terminology. Add compounds, mechanisms, dosage forms, components, claim concepts, CPC/IPC classes, or known applicants when relevant.
• Ask for provenance. Require publication numbers and returned source fields beside every factual statement.
• Avoid “complete” unless scope is defined. Database coverage, family definitions, publication delays, and status updates can affect the result set.