pitch.patent.click
Patent pending before your next demo.
One paragraph in. A provisional patent application drafted, stress-tested, and — when the gates below close — signed and filed with the USPTO by an independent USPTO-registered patent agent or attorney. One flat price. No filing, no charge.
↓ scroll · arrow keys
The US is first-to-file: being first to invent counts for nothing if someone else files first. And a public disclosure — demo day, a blog post, a sales call — starts a one-year statutory bar and destroys most foreign patent rights on the spot. Miss that window and no attorney at any price can get it back.
Until now the options were a $15,000 open-ended law-firm engagement with an hourly meter nobody will cap, or a do-it-yourself filing whose priority date quietly fails to support the real claims years later — exactly when the invention finally matters. The villain here is never the practitioner and never the USPTO. It is the meter, and its accomplice the credential maze: a system where knowing whether your filing is any good is either gatekept by the hour or abandoned to a template.
That is the whole product. No engagement letter, no relationship to manage, no strategy retainer. A person who came to file, files — and the customer is always the subject of the sentence: you describe, you watch, you're patent pending.
The surface is live with posted flat terms: $199 provisional filing, $799 utility application when converting within the 12-month window, government fees at cost and never marked up, and meter-released billing — charged only when the USPTO filing receipt exists.
The same page carries a first-class proof-of-concept banner: no USPTO filing actually occurs yet, and every simulated figure, receipt, and signature on the surface is labeled as simulated. The disclosure is designed as load-bearing content, not fine print — in this category, honesty is the differentiation.
The claim that matters — a real inventor's provisional, signed by an independent USPTO-registered practitioner and filed, with the receipt as evidence — posts when it has happened. Until then the deck asserts the design and the posted terms, nothing narrower.
An inventor does not want legal services. They want a filing. Scoping the brand to the task means the funnel starts at intent rather than education: nobody arrives at patent.click wondering what it sells, and the name is the search query. The task also defines the unit of pricing — one filing, one flat price — which is what makes "the price is the price" possible at all.
The point-solution rule cuts both ways. This ICP gets its own record, its own product, and its own economics, and the brand cross-sells nothing. The only adjacent offer is the same task's own future: converting the provisional to a utility filing inside its 12-month window, on the same flat terms.
Software runs the process. A human performs the acts the law reserves for one — with genuine responsibility for the work, never a signature rented onto it. Every filing is signed by an independent USPTO-registered patent agent or attorney, under their own registration number, by their own independent professional judgment. And a practitioner can say no: an independent practitioner who won't put their registration number on a filing declines, and their no is final against every process we run. Counterintuitively, that is the strongest authority claim on this page — the signature means something because it can be withheld.
Sperry v. Florida, 373 U.S. 379 (1963), unanimous: federal authorization to practice before the USPTO preempts state UPL rules. Patent practice is legal work, a licence is absolutely required — and the sovereign issuing it is the United States. This corridor stands on sixty-three years of settled law, not on a loophole.
The reserved step runs on the legal cell — the single entity designed to hold the api.lawyer demand surface and the gigs.lawyer supply door. That entity is designed, not formed; until formation and licensure close, the practitioner path described here is a designed contract, not a live service, and this deck says so on purpose.
intake, drafting, adversarial review, assembly, and docketing migrate toward Code; the practitioner's reserved judgment and signature do not — that floor is regulatory, not technical
The drafting and the attack loops are software; the customer pays for the one thing software can't do — an independent practitioner's judgment and signature. So the margin structure is a mix by design: software economics on the process, a human cost floor on the reserved step, priced as what it is. The practitioner's flat legal fee is fixed when the work is posted and is entirely their own — nobody on this platform is paid by the hour, and government fees pass through at cost, itemized.
▮▮▮posts when stack#1 §A5 resolves — filing volume, practitioner cost per filing, and blended margin are withheld until the numbers gate resolves. The posted consumer prices above are product facts; everything behind them is not yet.
Primary motion is B2A2C: our agent serves the inventor end to end, and the human practitioner enters exactly where the statute requires. The channel is the name itself — exact-match intent for humans, a clean namespace position for agents.
The transitional offer for the founder who isn't ready to buy today is designed as an annotated sample of a signature-grade provisional — showing what the agent drafts, what the adversarial pass flags, and what a practitioner checks before signing — demonstrating the authority claims instead of asserting them. The sample is not yet on the live surface; this claim posts when it ships at patent.click.
Secondary is B2A: the filing task exposed as a callable capability, so a product with inventors in it — a lab-notebook SaaS, a hardware community, a formation flow — can offer the filing inside its own workflow.
The callable path is designed to run through api.lawyer — one call opens the filing and runs it to the human boundary, with typed states and a webhook on the receipt. It is documented as design in the substrate's repository and is not yet a live third-party surface; the claim posts when an external caller's filing settles through it.
Three reinforcing positions, none of which is a feature:
patent.click serves: the full order surface — hero, posted flat terms, the three-step plan, the § 297-aware disclosure block, and the proof-of-concept banner stating plainly that no USPTO filing occurs yet.
The demand surface of the legal cell serves at api.lawyer, with the patent corridor named as its first.
The supply door serves at gigs.lawyer — the enrollment surface for the independent attorneys and USPTO patent agents whose signatures this product exists to deliver.
Practitioner supply is stated plainly: the network is an enrollment surface today, not a bench. Filings open when there is a registration number to sign them, and not before.
The finish line is deterministic: a government-issued receipt. When the first real filing exists, this claim flips with the receipt in evidence — and billing having released only on it.
The pending gates are a sequence, not a pile: entity formation and licensure → practitioner enrollment through the supply door → the proof-of-concept banner comes down → the first receipt posts here. The surface, the terms, and the disclosure discipline are already live; the deck's ambers mark exactly what is not.
If this was forwarded to you: patent.click is a patent filing as a finished task — described in one paragraph, drafted and stress-tested by software, and designed to be signed and filed by an independent USPTO-registered patent agent or attorney under their own registration, for one flat posted price, with no charge unless it is filed. The live page states exactly what is real today and what is not; so does this deck — every claim above carries its own state and evidence. If you're an inventor, look before your next disclosure. If you know one, forward this.