← All workflows

Claim Construction Chart

Draft Claim Construction Charts in Minutes, Not Hours

12 minutes with CaseMark

Run this workflow

Run it in CaseMark

Upload your documents and get a finished work product in minutes. New accounts get $5 free to run their first skill.

12 minutes with CaseMark

What you'll need

  • Asserted Patent(s)
  • Proposed Claim Constructions
  • Prosecution History

SOC 2 Type II · HIPAA compliant · $5 free credit

Workflow

Overview

CaseMark's Claim Construction Chart skill automates the drafting of joint claim construction charts for Markman proceedings in U.S. federal patent litigation. It organizes disputed claim terms, competing party constructions, and supporting evidence citations into a professionally formatted chart that complies with local patent rules. The result is a court-ready document that would otherwise take hours of meticulous manual formatting.

Preparing joint claim construction charts is one of the most tedious yet critical tasks in patent litigation. Attorneys must manually organize dozens of disputed terms across multiple patents, align competing constructions side by side, and meticulously cite intrinsic evidence from specifications, prosecution histories, and claim language — all while adhering to district-specific formatting requirements. A single formatting error or missing citation can undermine credibility at the Markman hearing.

CaseMark automates the structural and organizational heavy lifting of claim construction chart preparation. By ingesting patent documents, prosecution histories, and both parties' proposed constructions, CaseMark generates a properly formatted joint chart with accurate evidence citations, agreement status tracking, and court-compliant caption and certification blocks. Attorneys can focus on the substance of their claim construction arguments rather than wrestling with table formatting and citation consistency.

How it works

  1. 1. Upload your patent documents, prosecution history, and both parties' proposed constructions

  2. 2. AI organizes disputed claim terms into a structured chart with competing interpretations and evidence citations

  3. 3. Review and refine constructions, agreement status, and citation formatting

  4. 4. Export the finalized joint claim construction chart in your preferred format (DOCX, PDF)

What you get

  • Caption and Cover Page

  • Disputed Terms Table

  • Evidence Citations (Intrinsic & Extrinsic)

  • Agreement Status Summary

  • Certifications and Signature Blocks

What it handles

  • Structured disputed terms table with competing party constructions

  • Automatic intrinsic and extrinsic evidence citation formatting

  • Agreement status classification (Agreed, Partial, Disputed)

  • Court caption and cover page generation per local patent rules

  • Claim context extraction with surrounding claim language

  • Certification and signature block formatting per district requirements

Required documents

  • Asserted Patent(s)

    Full patent documents including claims, specification, and drawings for all asserted patents

    .pdf, .docx

  • Proposed Claim Constructions

    Both parties' proposed constructions for disputed claim terms, typically from contentions or meet-and-confer correspondence

    .pdf, .docx, .xlsx

  • Prosecution History

    Relevant prosecution history including office action responses, amendments, and examiner statements

    .pdf

Supporting documents

  • Prior Claim Construction Orders

    Any prior Markman rulings or claim construction orders from related cases involving the same patents

    .pdf, .docx

  • Local Patent Rules

    District-specific local patent rules governing claim construction statement format and requirements

    .pdf

  • Expert Declarations

    Expert reports or declarations providing extrinsic evidence supporting proposed constructions

    .pdf, .docx

Why teams use it

Reduce chart preparation time from hours to minutes while maintaining precision in claim language and citation formatting

Ensure compliance with district-specific local patent rules for joint claim construction statements

Minimize formatting errors and omissions in complex multi-term, multi-patent disputes

Easily track and update agreement status as terms resolve during meet-and-confer negotiations

Questions

What documents do I need to generate a claim construction chart?

You'll need the asserted patent(s) with full claim text and specification, the prosecution history, both parties' proposed constructions, and your case caption information. CaseMark uses these to build a comprehensive chart with properly formatted evidence citations.

Does CaseMark format the chart according to my district's local patent rules?

Yes. CaseMark supports formatting requirements from major patent districts including N.D. Cal., E.D. Tex., D. Del., and others. Simply specify your court and division, and the output will conform to applicable local patent rules for joint claim construction statements.

How does CaseMark handle intrinsic vs. extrinsic evidence citations?

CaseMark automatically organizes and formats citations to specification passages (col:line or paragraph), related claim language, prosecution history statements, and extrinsic sources like dictionaries or expert testimony. Each citation is linked to the specific disputed term and party construction it supports.

Can I use this for cases with multiple asserted patents?

Absolutely. CaseMark handles multi-patent cases by organizing disputed terms across all asserted patents, tracking which claims and patents each term appears in, and maintaining clear cross-references throughout the chart.

How accurate are the generated constructions?

CaseMark drafts the chart structure and organizes the constructions you and opposing counsel have proposed — it does not independently generate legal interpretations. You maintain full control to review, edit, and finalize all content before filing.

Can I update the chart as terms are agreed upon during meet-and-confer?

Yes. CaseMark makes it easy to reclassify terms from disputed to agreed or partially agreed, update constructions based on negotiations, and regenerate the chart as your positions evolve leading up to the Markman hearing.

Related

30b6 Corporate Rep

Master 30(b)(6) Depositions in Minutes, Not Hours

30b6 Deposition

Master 30(b)(6) Depositions in Minutes, Not Hours

Abstract of Judgment

Draft Judgment Abstracts in Minutes, Not Hours