Patent Prior Art Search for Personal Injury Attorneys with CASEpeer

CASEpeer Personal Injury Attorney Plaintiff PI

The Problem

Prior art searches for Plaintiff PI matters take days in Litify, and the attorney still has to read every hit to judge relevance.

What We Build in CASEpeer

AI runs the search across USPTO, EPO, and Litify, ranks hits by claim-overlap relevance, summarizes each, and builds the search report — attorney starts from a triaged list, not a raw dump. Purpose-built for teams running CASEpeer — uses the native API or agent integration so nothing leaves the system of record.

CASEpeer Integration Approach

1

Audit your CASEpeer configuration

We map the specific CASEpeer objects, custom fields, and workflows the automation needs to touch for your plaintiff pi practice.

2

Build on the CASEpeer API or agent

Integration happens inside CASEpeer — no data leaves the system, no parallel tool for your team to learn, no license changes.

3

Human-in-the-loop handoff

Every automation routes exceptions back to a human in CASEpeer with enough context to act — AI handles the 80%, your team owns the judgment calls.

See this running in your CASEpeer instance

30-minute call. We'll look at your actual CASEpeer setup and show exactly how this workflow fits.

More About This Workflow

Patent Prior Art Search for Personal Injury Attorneys

AI runs the search across USPTO, EPO, and Litify, ranks hits by claim-overlap relevance, summarizes each, and builds the search report — attorney starts from a triaged list, not a raw dump.

Other CASEpeer Automations