Fractional CIPO for Funded & Pre-Revenue Companies
Every dollar you spend on IP is a dollar you did not spend on product development, marketing, or revenue.
That trade-off is real. Investors expect IP. Competitors are filing. Your attorney is ready to draft. But no one is asking the question that matters: should you file this patent at all?
95% of patents are worthless. They protect features no customer cares about, target infringement you will never detect, or get designed around in an afternoon. Each one costs $30,000–$56,000 over its lifetime — and publishes your trade secrets to competitors for free.
The problem is not whether to file patents. The problem is removing the emotion from filing decisions and replacing it with concrete, actionable data — so your board can allocate capital to IP with the same rigor they apply to every other investment.
A fractional Chief IP Officer gives you that framework.
What the CIPO Does at This Stage
Removes the emotion from filing decisions
Inventors are excited. Attorneys are incentivized to file. Nobody in the room is asking whether this patent serves a business purpose. The CIPO is. Every invention gets a clear recommendation — invest, defer, or pass — backed by enforceability analysis, not enthusiasm. Your board decides with data.
Says “no” when “no” is the right answer
Saying no to a bad invention before any money is spent is the single highest-value activity in patent management. Every invention you decline to patent saves the full lifecycle cost — and keeps that capital available for product development, hiring, or the next fundraise. A healthy pass rate is 20–40%. If you are filing everything your attorney recommends, the evaluation process is not working.
Recognizes that the best patents are often yet to come
One of the biggest mistakes at this stage is filing too early — patenting the vision instead of the invention. Edison did not patent the light bulb. Twenty people had patents on light bulbs before him. His patent was on the filament — the last piece that made it work. The CIPO knows when to defer: document the invention, revisit when the technology matures, and file when the data supports it. Timing is a strategic decision, not a default.
Makes the patents you do file count
One well-done patent is worth more than five cheap ones. Every patent that passes the investment gate gets a prosecution playbook before outside counsel writes a single claim: targeted infringers, claim architecture, continuation strategy — all driven by your business objectives. No guesswork. No wasted drafts.
Enforces quality without adding cost
Every draft and office action response is reviewed before submission. Clear direction and pre-packaged invention disclosures eliminate the back-and-forth that drives unnecessary attorney hours. Alternative prosecution strategies get your patents issued in months instead of years — at lower total cost.
Gives your board the data to decide
Patent spending is tracked against budget. Every filing has a written business rationale. Your board sees what IP costs, what it produces, and how it compares to other uses of that capital. No surprises. No open-ended legal bills.
Your first patent is usually your least valuable — technology and market risks are highest at that point. Subsequent patents, filed when you have traction and market feedback, are more likely to align with actual commercial value.
The CIPO’s job is to make sure you do not burn your limited budget on the early ones that do not matter — and that you are positioned to file the later ones that do.
The Mistakes We See
These are the patterns that destroy patent value at pre-revenue companies. Every one of them happens because no one with business judgment is in the room when the filing decision is made.
Patenting the vision instead of the invention
The entrepreneur has a big idea — a platform, an ecosystem, a market they want to own. The attorney files a patent on the concept. But patents do not protect visions. They protect specific technical solutions. Edison did not patent the light bulb — twenty people had patents on light bulbs before him. His patent was on the filament, the last piece that made it work. Filing before you have data — prototypes tested, customers surveyed, competitors analyzed — produces patents on visions. Visions do not hold up in court.
Filing a provisional to “save money”
Provisional patent applications are one of the worst pieces of advice given to startup companies. A provisional delays your patent by up to a year. Its only real benefit is extending the patent term at year 20 — which matters to Big Pharma, not startups. Startups need patents fast. The Patent Prosecution Highway can get a patent issued in 9–12 months. A provisional pushes that timeline back a full year, doubles the billing (you pay for the provisional now, then the full application later), and creates a false sense of progress. Worse: “kitchen sink” provisionals — filed by grabbing pitch decks, lab notebooks, and source code at the last minute — commit the company to publishing those internal documents when the non-provisional publishes. If the invention is not ready to patent, do not file anything. Wait until you know what you are protecting.
Undetectable infringement
You patented a server-side algorithm that runs behind a competitor’s firewall. You will never know if they are infringing, and you cannot prove it in court. That patent should have been a trade secret. Instead, you published your approach for competitors to read — and paid $60,000 for the privilege. Most software patents fail this test.
Claims that target the wrong actor
Your patent describes steps performed by the end user, not the competitor who sells the product. A heat-moldable shoe insert where the claims describe the consumer heating it, molding it, and inserting it? The infringer is your customer. Are you going to sue them? Your attorney wrote claims they could get allowed. Whether you could ever enforce them was not their problem.
Trivial design-arounds
A competitor changes one element and walks around your claims entirely. Your patent was a speedbump, not a wall. Patents only have value when they cover the best way to solve a problem — the way competitors must use. A patent on one approach among several equivalent options is a patent on nothing.
No business alignment
The patent covers a feature no customer cares about. It protects nothing that drives revenue. Technically impressive features that customers do not pay for are worthless. Apple’s slide-to-unlock patent was technically trivial — but it addressed a real customer problem. Technical sophistication is not business value.
Hiring Big Law on a startup budget
The economics of Big Law guarantee that startups get the least experienced attorneys, pay the highest per-dollar markup, and receive work product designed to avoid client pushback rather than to build enforceable assets. On a $15,000 patent application, roughly $5,000 goes to the associate who actually writes it — and that associate is often the least experienced attorney in the building. The partner does the intake meeting; the first-year associate does the work.
Anchoring to an early filing date
Patent attorneys are trained to obsess over early filing dates. But every patent in a family expires at 20 years from the earliest filing date. Companies that file early and disclose broadly are locked into a declining timeline. Continuations filed ten years later have only ten years of enforceable life. When the company finally hits traction — when the patents would actually matter — they are expiring.
The Engagement
| Invention evaluation | Concrete enforceability analysis — invest, defer, or pass — before any money is spent |
| Prosecution playbooks | Targeted infringers, claim architecture, continuation strategy |
| Quality review | Every filing reviewed against standards before submission |
| Cost tracking | Budget oversight and spend validation on every patent |
| Counsel management | Streamlined communication with outside counsel |
| Board reporting | IP investment data your board can act on |
Investment
Filing patents is a cost. IP strategy is capital allocation. Those are different things.
The CIPO engagement is not an add-on to your filing budget. It governs the decisions that determine whether your IP spend produces strategic value — or expensive wallpaper.
Engagements begin with a 90-day strategic build — portfolio assessment, invention evaluation framework, prosecution playbooks, quality standards, and board reporting. After the foundation is in place, the engagement shifts to monthly light oversight.
| Strategic build (90 days) | Starting at $25,000 |
| Monthly oversight | Starting at $5,000/month |
One misaligned patent strategy can quietly burn six figures over time. One enforceable patent aligned to revenue can change valuation multiples.
Common Questions
We only have budget for a few patents. Is a CIPO worth it?
That is exactly when a CIPO is worth it. When every patent competes against product development and revenue for the same dollar, the filing decisions matter more — not less. The CIPO ensures each patent serves a real business purpose, passes concrete enforceability criteria, and is built to a standard that holds up under scrutiny.
What if our attorney says we should file?
Your attorney’s job is to draft and prosecute patents. Filing more patents is more revenue for them. That is not a conflict of interest — it is a structural incentive. The CIPO provides the unbiased business analysis that your attorney is not positioned to give: Does this invention justify the investment? Can infringement be detected? Will the claims survive a design-around? Your board gets a recommendation with the reasoning, not just an invoice.
How does this work with our existing patent attorney?
They keep drafting and prosecuting — but with clear instructions, complete invention disclosures, and fast decisions. The adversarial dynamic disappears. It becomes a working partnership.
What if we are not ready to file yet?
Good — that means the evaluation is working. “Defer” is a legitimate outcome. The invention gets documented with the conditions that would move it to “invest.” When the technology matures, the market shifts, or the data supports it, you file from a position of knowledge instead of urgency. The best patents are rarely the first ones you think of.
Are we adding cost to the patent process?
No. The CIPO typically lowers total patent spend — or makes the same budget go farther. Streamlined communication, clear direction, and strategic filing decisions eliminate waste. And the patents you decline to file? That is where the real savings are. Every bad patent you avoid saves $30,000–$56,000 and keeps your trade secrets off the public record.
What do the first 90 days look like?
The first 90 days build the strategic foundation. Month one: we assess any existing patents or pending applications, establish the invention evaluation framework, and set prosecution ground rules — so every filing decision has a written business rationale before any money is spent. Month two: prosecution playbooks for any active filings, quality review standards, and cost tracking setup — so your board sees what IP costs and what it produces. Month three: board reporting framework, deployment plan for existing patents, and the ongoing oversight structure. After 90 days, the engagement shifts to monthly light oversight — invention evaluation as new ideas surface, prosecution review on active filings, cost tracking, and quarterly board reporting. The heavy lifting is done. The system runs.
Why does IP need board-level attention at this stage?
Patent decisions have 20-year consequences. They affect your next fundraise, your competitive positioning, and your exit options. And at this stage, every dollar spent on IP is a dollar that did not go to building the product. Those trade-offs belong at the C-suite and board level.
