# US Patent Claim Support Worksheet

Use this worksheet to trace proposed claim language to the inventor's disclosure,
the draft specification and any relevant drawings. It is a drafting review aid,
not a patentability opinion, a filing form or a substitute for professional review.

Download and complete your own copy. Downloading this blank file does not upload
your invention to Patent Task. Follow your organization's rules before sharing a
completed worksheet containing unpublished technical information.

## Identify the material being reviewed

- Internal matter reference:
- Technical disclosure title and version/date:
- Specification version/date:
- Claim set version/date:
- Drawing set version/date:
- Reviewer and review date:
- Confirmed source files or inventor interview notes:
- Questions awaiting inventor confirmation:

## Trace proposed limitations

Copy the actual claim wording. Use a page, paragraph, figure or note identifier
that another reviewer can locate. Write "not found" where support is missing;
do not supply a plausible technical fact to complete a row.

| Claim number | Exact limitation or relationship | Disclosure location and supporting wording | Draft specification location | Drawing / reference signs, if relevant | Confirmed, unclear or not found | Question or correction | Decision, owner and date |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |

## Fictional worked row

This row is manually prepared teaching material, not an AI result or a customer
record. The hypothetical source describes a screw that moves a jaw along a
guide slot. It does not specify the screw-to-jaw connection.

| Claim number | Proposed wording | Source support | Open point | Review action |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | "a screw arranged to advance the movable jaw" | Hypothetical disclosure: the screw moves the jaw along the guide slot | How does the screw engage and retain the jaw? | Ask the inventor; record the answer and check the resulting description before accepting the wording |

## Review dependencies and changes

- Does each dependent claim refer to an earlier claim and add a limitation?
- Are part names and relationships consistent across claims and description?
- Has the AI introduced a material, dimension, result or component not supplied?
- Does each edited limitation still match the inventor-confirmed disclosure?
- Are relevant drawings and reference signs consistent with the revised text?
- Which claim-scope decisions require practitioner review against verified prior art?

Finding a supporting sentence alone does not establish adequate written
description, enablement, novelty or useful claim scope. Do not infer an
examination outcome from the number of completed rows.

## Record the revision

- Issue identified:
- Exact original passage:
- Proposed correction:
- Source or inventor confirmation supporting the correction:
- Related claims, paragraphs and figures checked:
- Accepted / rejected / awaiting information:
- Revised file name/version:
- Reviewer and date:

## References and next steps

- USPTO utility patent application guide:
  https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/utility-patent
- USPTO MPEP 2163, written description:
  https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2163.html
- Annotated claim example:
  https://patenttask.com/blog/patent-claims-example
- Invention disclosure template:
  https://patenttask.com/blog/invention-disclosure-template
- US drafting workflow:
  https://patenttask.com/write/us-patent

Prepared by Patent Task Editorial Team. Updated 2026-10-20.
Patent Task is independent software and is not a patent office.