District court, PTAB, TTAB, customs - one board, every proceeding's status.
IP litigation runs a parallel-proceedings chessboard no generic litigation pack tracks: contentions on rails, a Markman stage that revalues the whole case, and fixed statutory clocks that don't care about your local rules. MatterOS runs all of it as one matter.
What drives this practice: court-calendar
What actually eats a IP litigator's week.
Posture flips which fixed clock actually matters
The IPR bar is defense-critical; marking and damages-accrual dates are plaintiff-critical. MatterOS asks which side you're on and re-weights spotlight facts around the answer, instead of surfacing every clock with equal, undifferentiated urgency.
Claim construction revalues the entire case in one hearing
A Markman ruling changes the liability analysis overnight - it's a case-revaluation trigger, not just another calendar entry. MatterOS's entry effect on a construction ruling prompts a strategy-memo checklist item automatically the moment the ruling lands.
Parallel proceedings need their own board, not a footnote
One matter might run simultaneously in district court, before the PTAB, before the TTAB, and through customs recordation. MatterOS's signature synthesis section is a parallel-proceedings board tracking status and next event on each one separately.
The stages MatterOS already knows this practice runs through.
Not a generic case-management pipeline - the actual shape of a matter in this discipline, branches and terminal stages included.
- Pre-Suit Investigation & Notice
- Pleadings
- Contentions
- Claim Construction (Markman)
- Fact Discovery
- Expert Discovery
- Dispositive Motions
- Trial
- Settlement / License
- Post-Trial & Injunction Compliance
The IPR one-year bar
Fixed at service plus one year under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) when you're defense-side - not a filing formality, a strategy deadline. MatterOS arms it the moment service is logged and adds escalating decision-memo checkpoints at 6, 3, and 1 month out, so the IPR-or-not call gets made with real runway instead of at the deadline itself.
Prunes stages, cascade, and vocabulary.
Links to Prosecution-pack assets when the firm holds both (cross-matter link).
Starts the IPR one-year bar for defendants.
Service + 1y (35 U.S.C. § 315(b), fixed) - defense-side only, the pack's scariest fixed date.
Marking / notice / registration dates bound it - extraction-derived.
Damages Tracker
Damages-period length times theory - reasonable-royalty inputs or lost-profits inputs - against the claimed figure, flagging unmarked-product damages erosion on the plaintiff side and willfulness-multiplier exposure on the defense side.
MatterOS already knows what this practice's paperwork looks like.
Drop a file into the matter and it gets filed to the right category on arrival - no manual sorting, no naming convention to remember.
Never the wrong word in front of a client - or a court.
Every draft and every synthesis MatterOS produces for this practice follows the same negative-vocabulary rules a careful associate would.
The checklist MatterOS opens before you've had coffee.
Six reasons IP litigators choose MatterOS.
`ip_type` prunes hard: trademark and copyright matters skip Markman and contentions entirely, and trade-secret matters add identification-with-particularity gates instead - the workflow matches the right, not a one-size-fits-all IP template.
Vocabulary never mixes regimes: patent claims and limitations stay separate from trademark likelihood-of-confusion analysis and copyright substantial-similarity tests, even within the same firm's broader IP practice.
Contentions deadlines function like pleadings-on-rails, computed from the district's own local patent rules overlay rather than a generic litigation timeline.
Construed-terms get built into their own table as claim-construction briefing develops, so 'what did the court actually construe, and how' is a queryable fact, not something re-read from the ruling every time it matters.
Copyright's registration-before-suit prerequisite surfaces as an explicit plaintiff-side filing gate post-Fourth Estate, catching the exact procedural trap that kills a copyright complaint on a technicality.
Cross-links to Prosecution-pack assets when the firm holds both, so an asserted patent's prosecution history is one click away instead of a separate file search.
What this looks like on a real file.
Service is logged on a new patent-infringement defense. MatterOS arms the IPR one-year bar immediately and schedules the first decision-memo checkpoint for six months out - well before the bar itself, while there's still time to actually evaluate the petition.
Contentions deadlines come from the district's local patent rules overlay and land on the calendar automatically, followed by claim-construction briefing that builds a construed-terms table as the record develops.
The Markman ruling comes down. MatterOS's entry effect fires a strategy-memo checklist item the same day, because a claim-construction ruling changes the liability analysis - not just the calendar - and that shift deserves an immediate re-evaluation, not a footnote in next week's status call.
Questions IP litigators actually ask.
Does MatterOS track the IPR one-year bar automatically?
Yes, on defense-side matters - it arms the fixed 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) bar the moment service is logged, and layers escalating decision-memo checkpoints at 6, 3, and 1 month out because the IPR decision is a strategic call that needs real runway, not a filing-formality deadline.
How does it handle a matter running in district court and before the PTAB at the same time?
The parallel-proceedings board tracks each proceeding - district court, PTAB, TTAB, customs recordation - separately, with its own status and next event, so a matter running on multiple boards doesn't collapse into one undifferentiated timeline.
Does the workflow differ for a trademark case versus a patent case?
Substantially - `ip_type` prunes stages and vocabulary hard: trademark and copyright matters skip the Markman and contentions stages entirely, and trade-secret matters add their own identification-with-particularity requirements instead.
What happens when the court issues a claim construction ruling?
MatterOS's entry effect on the ruling automatically prompts a strategy-memo checklist item, because a Markman ruling revalues the case's liability analysis - the pack treats it as the case-changing event it actually is, not just another calendar entry.
See how MatterOS runs a ip litigation matter - on your own file.
Drop in the documents from a real matter and watch it assemble: parties, dates, deadlines, and a synthesis written the way IP litigators actually talk. Free 7-day trial, no card required to start.