Contractual Precedent Retrieval System for Legal Drafting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Transactional business lawyers face challenges in efficiently finding and leveraging relevant contractual precedents due to the time-consuming and labor-intensive nature of searching through large volumes of contractual or agreement data.

Innovation Solution

A system and method that enables users to search, filter, organize, share, and integrate contractual precedents into word-processing documents, utilizing a database-driven information-retrieval system with search engines and user interfaces for efficient retrieval and drafting of contracts.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If lawyers manually search through large volumes of contractual data to find precedents, then they can find relevant precedents, but the process becomes time-consuming and labor-intensive

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprecision of precedent retrievalVSAvoidtime required for precedent research

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical searching through contractual data with an automated electronic information-retrieval system that uses search engines and databases to automatically locate and retrieve relevant contractual precedents, eliminating the need for lawyers to manually review large volumes of documents

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary information-retrieval system that acts as a mediator between lawyers and contractual data, using specialized search algorithms and database structures to efficiently match search queries with relevant precedents, thereby reducing both time and manual effort

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If lawyers manually review and integrate contractual precedents into draft contracts, then they can ensure accuracy and relevance, but the process becomes labor-intensive

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveaccuracy of precedent integrationVSAvoidease of contract drafting

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables the system to perform self-service by automatically retrieving, analyzing, and integrating relevant contractual precedents into draft contracts based on search criteria and user preferences, reducing the manual labor required while maintaining accuracy through automated quality control mechanisms

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses copying by creating and maintaining a digital repository of contractual precedents that can be efficiently replicated, analyzed, and integrated into new draft contracts, allowing lawyers to work with standardized templates and clauses that have been previously validated

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

3Productivity

If lawyers use traditional manual methods for researching contractual precedents, then they can maintain control over the process, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveproductivity in contract negotiationVSAvoidcomplexity of information-retrieval system

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the information-retrieval system into modular components including search engines, databases, user interfaces, and integration tools, allowing each component to be independently optimized and managed while working together to enhance overall productivity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS9171082B2Systems, methods, and interfaces for researching contractual precedents

Publication Date: 2015.10.27 THOMSON REUTERS ENTERPRISE CENTRE GMBH

AI summary

The present inventors, devised among other things, an exemplary method of researching provisions of contracts. The exemplary method entails receiving user selection of one or more predefined queries for contractual precedents, and executing a search of one or more databases containing agreements based on the received user selection. After executing the search, the method entails displaying a subset of the search results based on a predefined filter stored in association with an identifier for the user. The predefined filter may filter based on traits such as jurisdiction, deal size, industry, or a list of companies.