Patent research as part of R&D under a government contract: typical errors and recommendations

M. S. Toforov; O. N. Nikonova; L. N. Gerasimova; D. B. Shcharapov; Е. Yu. Zhirnov; E. G. Timofeeva

doi:10.35825/2587-5728-2026-10-1-93-108

Patent research as part of R&D under a government contract: typical errors and recommendations

M. S. Toforov, O. N. Nikonova, L. N. Gerasimova, D. B. Shcharapov, Е. Yu. Zhirnov, E. G. Timofeeva

https://doi.org/10.35825/2587-5728-2026-10-1-93-108

Full Text:

PDF (Rus)

Generate QR code

Abstract

Highlights Systemic errors in patent research are identified and quantitatively assessed. Step by step recommendations and templates for filling out all mandatory report forms are developed, which reduce the number of report returns for revision by 2–3 times and minimize the risks of infringing third party rights. An action algorithm is proposed that saves budget funds by avoiding unjustified acquisition of licences. Relevance. Patent research is an integral part of R&D under state defence contracts. However, many such reports contain errors that lead to unjustified budget expenditures, delays in project execution, and the risk of infringing exclusive rights of third parties. Purpose of the study is to develop practical recommendations for drafting a patent research report, tailored to the requirements of a state defense contract. Study base sources. Regulatory legal acts governing the identification, legal protection and use of intellectual property results generated during R&D ordered by the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation. Research methods. Analytical, formal legal method. Errors were analyzed in patent research reports prepared by industrial organizations at various stages of R&D. Results. For the first time, on a statistically significant array of patent research reports, typical errors made by industrial organisations are identified and systematised. The most critical errors are found to be: confusion between the concepts of “technical level” and “prior art” (occurs in 68% of reports); absence of a comparative analysis of essential features of the object and the patent claims (54%); unsubstantiated conclusions about patent freedom to operate (FTO) at early stages of development work (47%); and incomplete search guidelines (73%). Templates for filling out all mandatory report forms (B.6.1–B.6.4, D.1.1–D.3.1.3) are developed and provided, along with step by step explanations. An algorithm of actions for the contractor upon detection of a “blocking patent” is formulated, including analysis of the patent licensing activity of the right holder and assessment of the feasibility of challenging the patent or concluding a licence agreement. Conclusion. The prepared recommendations will improve the quality of patent research and of R&D in general, the ultimate outcomes of which are the modernisation of existing or the development of new models of weapons and military equipment in the interests of Russia’s defence and security. Practical significance of the work lies in reducing the number of patent research reports returned for revision by 2–3 times, lowering the risks of R&D being deemed invalid due to infringement of exclusive rights, and ensuring timely securing of the Russian Federation’s rights to the created intellectual property results.