Chart the claims against the standard, clause by clause
Universal Charts builds a Standard Essential Patent chart entirely by chat. JR3 ranks the standards your amended claims actually read on, pulls the normative text live from ETSI, builds the grid in the background with the Office Action itself as the source — then scores every element against thresholds you dictate in plain English.
Starts mid-matter
The Office Action Response shell, the cited-art charts and the examiner analysis are already in context. One sentence starts the essentiality analysis — no new tool, no re-upload.
Ranked standards, cited
Candidates come back ranked HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW with the exact element-to-clause evidence behind each, then the winner is pulled live from ETSI at the right version.
Your rubric, your labels
Dictate thresholds and band names in plain English. JR3 writes them into the chart's rules, and every mapping run on that chart ranks against them.
Reusable chart types
Save the whole build to the Charts Library — columns, mapping instructions, source bindings, rubric and thresholds. The cell data never goes with it.
The essentiality analysis starts from one sentence
Nothing is re-uploaded. The Office Action Response shell, the cited-art charts and the examiner analysis are already in the project, so asking JR3 to keep the amendments consistent with a standard is enough to begin — the SEP work picks up exactly where the OA Builder left off.
- ✓Picks up an in-flight matter — no new tool, no re-upload
- ✓The whole prosecution record is already the working context
- ✓One plain-language sentence starts the standard-selection analysis
The standard comes back ranked — with the evidence for the ranking
Ask JR3 to keep the amendments consistent with a standard and it runs the pinned SEP Standard Selection & Identification skill across the amended claim language. Three candidates stack into the chat with HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW confidence, each showing the claim element or spec paragraph that drove the match. Select one and Junior pulls it live from ETSI at the exact version, indexing its normative clauses as chart context.
- ✓Element-to-clause evidence on every recommendation — 1B to §6.2, 1C to §7.1 — before you commit
- ✓Pulled live from ETSI at the version that governs — TS 26.253 v17.2.0
- ✓Normative clauses indexed as mapping context, so the chart maps against the authoritative text
- ✓Days of manual reading across 3GPP, ETSI and ISO come back ranked and auditable
The Office Action itself is the source column
Describe the chart in a sentence and JR3 builds it in a background batch while you keep working. grid_build creates the sep_qualification grid, ingests the Office Action PDF directly as the source column — the amended claims parsed into 12 claim-element rows — and adds the standard as the target column with its own mapping instructions.
- ✓The Office Action PDF is the source — no copy-paste, no reformatting into a spreadsheet
- ✓Amended claims 1–18 parsed into 12 atomic claim-element rows
- ✓Runs in the background: every construction step is a named, inspectable command
- ✓A live chart tile pins into the project context and counts up as the batch lands
Your rubric, your labels — in plain language
Say your thresholds in one sentence — Strong ≥ 0.85, Possible ≥ 0.60, Weak ≥ 0.35 — and rename a band while you are at it. JR3 writes them into the chart's rules, so every mapping run ranks against your firm's standard of proof and the labels in the deliverable read the way your practice talks.
- ✓Thresholds and band names dictated in plain English, written straight into Chart Rules
- ✓Relabel a band and it changes everywhere — 'Possible' becomes 'Needs support'
- ✓The essentiality test behind each band is stated explicitly, so a Strong pill always means the same thing: a normative 'shall' clause requires the element
- ✓The scoring rubric is yours, not the vendor's
Four analyses, one run, aligned row by row
Nest child columns where they belong and give each its own instruction. Enablement Mapping (§112) hangs under the claims; Citation and Claim Refinement — Target hang under the standard. A single run then produces the essentiality read, the written-description check, the verbatim pull-quote and the proposed fix — every one of them lined up against the same element.
- ✓Each child column carries its own mapping instructions
- ✓Citation quotes the controlling normative clause verbatim — 'shall' language only
- ✓Claim Refinement proposes amendment language that better targets the mapped clause
- ✓Four passes of associate work in one command
Demo matter: an Office Action Response for App. 17/482,933 charted against 3GPP TS 26.253 — 3 Strong, 1 Needs support, 1 Weak, with element 1D short of §112 written-description support. Illustrative content, not a customer result.
Save the build, not the data
Save as Chart Type stores the whole construction into the Charts Library — columns, per-column mapping instructions, source bindings, and your rubric and thresholds. The cell data never goes with it. What gets saved is how you like your charts built, not this matter's answers.
- ✓Columns, mapping instructions, source bindings, rubric and thresholds all travel together
- ✓Cell data is never written into the chart type
- ✓One matter's build becomes a firm asset for every SEP analysis after it
It comes back as a template, every instruction intact
The saved type reappears under Charts, beside Patent Family, Infringement, Prior Art and Contract Analysis. Instantiate it and you get a fresh chart with the same child columns, the same thresholds and the same citation rule — waiting for the next set of claims.
- ✓Your chart type sits alongside Junior's built-in types in Select Chart Type
- ✓Instantiating produces a clean template with every instruction preserved
- ✓The next SEP analysis starts configured instead of starting from a blank grid
Three concrete fixes — and an offer to make them
JR3 exports an OA Response Improvement Report into the project: three concrete fixes to strengthen the response against the standard, drawn from what the chart exposed. Then it offers to revise the amendments to better target TS 26.253 — so the chart, the §112 citations and the response stay in sync.
- ✓A report filed straight into the project, not downloaded and lost
- ✓Fixes grounded in the elements the chart flagged
- ✓JR3 offers to revise the amendments to better target the mapped clauses
- ✓Chart, §112 citations and the Office Action Response stay aligned
JR3 remembers how you like your charts built.
Columns, mapping instructions, source bindings, rubric and thresholds — saved as a reusable chart type · The cell data never is
Run the essentiality analysis on your own rubric
From ranked standard selection to a clause-by-clause chart, a reusable chart type, and an improvement report that revises the response — see SEP Analysis in Universal Charts on a matter like yours.