The best patent communications explain the journey, not the science. That is the lesson from how specialist PR agencies and listed companies handle IP news, and it applies to any founder-led business sitting on a pending application.
The dilemma is real. A patent filing is one of the strongest signals of innovation a young company can send. But the detail that makes it valuable is exactly what you shouldn't hand to competitors, and most audiences couldn't follow the claims anyway.
So how do you talk about something you can't fully describe, in a way that builds credibility with customers and value with shareholders? Here's how the people who do it well approach it.
Good agencies treat each procedural milestone as the news, and describe the invention only by the problem it solves.
UK-listed life sciences companies show this most clearly, because they announce every step. When Fusion Antibodies received a US issue notification, its announcement explained what that notice means (approval, with grant scheduled) and framed it as progress towards a value-creating milestone. Nothing in it required the reader to understand antibody engineering.
Sareum took the same approach with a US Notice of Allowance. The headline was the milestone; the substance was the map. It now had protection across Europe, China, Japan and, soon, the US. The reader takes away one idea: the moat is getting wider.
The pattern is consistent:
Be specific about the asset. Name the patent office, the territory, the status and, once published, the number.
Be general about the invention. Describe the outcome it enables, not how it works.
Connect it to the business. Say what the protection means for customers, partners or the company's position.
There is a trap on the other side, too. Patent commentators such as IPWatchdog criticise releases that trumpet a "breakthrough" without saying what is actually protected, or even quoting the patent number. Vague about the detail is fine. Vague about the asset looks like hype.
A patent takes years to grant, which gives you five or six legitimate stories, not one. Each stage makes different information public and supports different language.
Stage | What's public | What you can safely say |
|---|---|---|
Filed, unpublished | Nothing | "Patent pending", plus the problem the innovation addresses, in outcome terms |
Published (around 18 months after first filing) | The application text | The application number and the broad field it covers |
Search and examination | The patent office's view on novelty | That the application is progressing through examination |
Allowance or intention to grant | That grant is coming | That the application has been allowed, with expected timing |
Granted | The full patent | The patent number and territory, and what it protects in business terms |
New filings and territories | A growing patent family | The portfolio story: coverage, breadth and strategic intent |
The early stages are about intent and capability. The later ones are about owning an asset. A steady cadence of honest updates builds more credibility than one big announcement.
A UK patent can take anywhere from under a year to more than five, and the pace is partly the applicant's choice. That choice shapes the comms calendar as much as the legal one.
The standard route. The UK IPO itself warns that application to grant can take up to six years. Practitioners typically quote three to five. The default rhythm is a search report around six months after filing, publication at around 18 months, and substantive examination requested within six months of publication. Several rounds of examination are common before an application is in order for grant.
The fast track. Applicants can speed things up by requesting combined search and examination, accelerated processing or early publication. One hard floor remains: the IPO can't grant until at least three months after publication. With everything accelerated, attorneys cite grants in as little as nine months from filing. The IPO's Green Channel for inventions with an environmental benefit is the best-known route. In its first year, government figures put average Green Channel grants at eight months, against 32 months for standard applications.
Loughborough-based fuel cell developer Intelligent Energy files first in the UK specifically to use the Green Channel. Its head of IP told the IPO that accelerated examination often gets a UK patent granted within the 12-month priority year. The company then uses that UK grant to fast-track filings abroad under the Patent Prosecution Highway. The comms lesson: an early UK grant becomes a story in its own right, and a springboard for the international story that follows.
Cambridge biotech Sareum shows the multi-year, multi-territory journey. Protection for its lead drug candidate, SDC-1801, came in stages: approvals from the European, Chinese and Japanese patent offices, then a US Notice of Allowance announced in September 2024, with grant expected by year end. Each step was a separate, credible update, and each one reinforced the same message: coverage across every major market.
Long doesn't always end in grant. Stephen Thaler filed two UK applications in late 2018 naming his AI system, DABUS, as the inventor. The IPO refused them, and appeals ran through the High Court and Court of Appeal until the Supreme Court dismissed the case in December 2023. That's five years, ending in refusal. It's an extreme case, but it makes a practical point: a comms plan should never assume the ending. Say only what each stage has actually confirmed.
Every formal step in a UK application produces a letter or a public record, and each one is a natural trigger for a comms activity. Your patent attorney receives these; your comms team should be copied in on a simple summary of each.
Official communication (UK IPO) | Typical timing | What it tells you | Comms trigger |
|---|---|---|---|
Filing receipt | On filing | A filing date is secured | Start using "patent pending"; brief the board and investors; update the website and pitch deck |
Patents Journal filing notice | Shortly after filing | Applicant, number and title are now public | Nothing to announce; check the title is generic enough to give nothing away |
Search report, or combined search and examination report | Around 6 months (1 to 2 months if accelerated) | First independent view of novelty | Private investor update; board decision on international filing |
Priority deadline | 12 months | Last date to file abroad and keep the original date | Announce international (PCT) or overseas filings as a "growing portfolio" story |
Publication | Around 18 months | The full application is public | Publish the application number; an explainer blog or LinkedIn post on the problem it solves |
Examination reports | Months to years after examination is requested | Objections to answer, often several rounds | Usually no external comms; note progress in investor updates |
Notification of intention to grant | At least one month before grant (two if no objections were raised) | Grant is coming on a stated date | Plan the grant launch; listed companies assess whether it's inside information |
Notification of grant and certificate | On grant; recorded in the Patents Journal | The patent is granted and enforceable | The main announcement: patent number, territory, business meaning; mark products; assess a Patent Box claim |
Renewal fees | Yearly, for up to 20 years | The patent stays in force | Portfolio summary in the annual report and investor materials |
Filing through Europe instead? The European Patent Office route has close equivalents: a search report, publication at 18 months, an "intention to grant" communication, then grant. After a European grant, the patent must be validated in each chosen country within three months, which gives you one more milestone: "now in force in X countries".
Two of these letters are more important than they look. The notification of intention to grant is the best trigger for planning, because it gives you a fixed date weeks ahead. The search report is the best trigger for investor confidence, because it's the first independent judgement on the invention, and it arrives within months, not years.
The single most valuable fact in any patent story is the date the application was filed. It's the date the world is measured against, and it decides who wins when a later application claims the same thing.
It fixes what counts as prior art. Novelty and inventiveness are judged as of the priority date, which is normally the first filing date. Anything published before it can be used against the application. Anything published after it can't.
It gives you a 12-month head start on later filings. Under the Paris Convention, a first filing gives a right of priority for 12 months. A later application for the same invention, whether a PCT, European or overseas filing, can claim the original date. Disclosures that happen in between, including a competitor's, can't then be used against it. This is why the common UK approach is a first UK filing, followed within the year by international filings.
It only protects what you actually filed. Priority is judged claim by claim. A later claim keeps the earlier date only if the first application clearly and unambiguously disclosed the same invention. Improvements developed during the year get the later date, and anything published in the meantime can be cited against them. The usual fix is a further priority filing for each significant development, all consolidated before the 12 months are up.
It's easy to lose. Priority has to be formally claimed, and the applicant on the later filing must be the same as on the first, or its legal successor. Ownership transfers done late or incorrectly are a known trap, and they can rarely be fixed afterwards. Losing priority can be fatal to the later application.
File first, talk second. Your own announcement, demo, conference talk or investor deck can destroy novelty if it comes before the filing. Build the comms plan backwards from the filing date.
Filing unlocks disclosure, within limits. Once the first application is in, the invention it describes can be discussed. New features developed since then can't, until they've been filed too.
Make the date part of the story. "Priority secured in March 2026" is a precise, checkable claim of first-mover status. It tells investors when the clock started, not just that a patent exists.
Treat the 12-month deadline as a comms milestone. International filing decisions made in the priority year are a natural "expanding the portfolio" update.
Keep ownership tidy. If IP sits with founders, a university or a parent company, confirm the chain of title before any later filing, and before you announce one.
Keeping the detail back isn't evasive. It's how a well-run IP strategy works, for four reasons.
Confidentiality. UK and European applications usually stay unpublished for around 18 months from first filing. Explaining the invention before then hands competitors a head start the patent system deliberately withholds.
Claim scope. What a company says in public can be used to interpret, or challenge, what it claims in its application. Loose marketing language is a legal liability, not just a style issue.
Honesty about scope. Patent pending status covers the specific claims filed, not the whole product or company. "Our patent-pending platform" can quietly overclaim. It's also an offence in the UK to describe something as patented, or "patent applied for", when it isn't.
Market disclosure. For listed companies, a significant patent milestone may be inside information. AIM companies must disclose it promptly, via a regulatory announcement, before it appears in marketing. Private companies aren't bound by this, but the discipline is worth borrowing: tell investors first and consistently.
Investors don't value patents; they value what patents protect. As one patent firm puts it, a patent on its own doesn't impress investors. What does is a clear line from the patent to the product, the market and the strategy.
That's why the phrase "patent pending" matters less to sophisticated investors than whether it sits inside a coherent IP strategy. The communications job is to make that strategy visible without exposing the invention. In practice, it shows up in five ways:
Defensibility. Protection signals that the product is hard to copy, which reduces risk in the eyes of investors and acquirers.
Fit with the plan. Filings that track the product roadmap, target markets and fundraising milestones read as strategy, not paperwork.
Layered protection. A mix of broad and narrow claims, across chosen territories, shows the company has thought about where it will compete and defend.
Brand working alongside patents. Research using USPTO data found that pairing patents with trademarks roughly doubled patent value. Innovation and brand reinforce each other.
Earnings, not just valuation. In the UK, the Patent Box regime lets qualifying profits from patented inventions be taxed at an effective 10%. A granted patent can improve the bottom line directly.
One honest caveat. Many investors discount pending applications against granted patents, and they're right to. Pending status shows intent and capability; grant turns it into an asset. Communicating the journey between the two, stage by stage, is how a company earns credit for the value before it lands.
Before any patent-related announcement, post or investor update, check that it:
States the status accurately: filed, published, allowed or granted
Names the office and territory, and the number once public
Describes the problem solved, not the mechanism
Avoids implying the whole product or company is protected
Has been reviewed by your patent attorney
Links the milestone to strategy: roadmap, markets, partners or revenue
Reaches investors first, or at the same time as the market
Fits a planned cadence of updates across the whole journey
The companies that communicate IP well aren't the ones with the most dramatic inventions. They're the ones that turn a slow, technical, largely invisible process into a clear, credible story of value being built. Say enough to be believed. Never say everything.
Be specific about the asset and general about the invention. Name the patent office, territory, status and, once published, the application or patent number. Describe the problem the invention solves and what protection means for customers or investors, not how it works. The claims themselves never need to appear in marketing.
Yes, once an application has actually been filed, and for as long as it remains live. It covers the specific claims filed, not the whole product or company, so avoid wording that implies broader protection. In the UK, it's an offence to describe something as patented or "patent applied for" when it isn't.
Usually three to five years, and the UK IPO says it can take up to six. With accelerated processing, grant can come within about nine months of filing. The IPO's Green Channel for inventions with an environmental benefit has averaged around eight months.
The first filing date, or priority date, fixes what counts as prior art. For 12 months afterwards, later applications for the same invention, including international filings, can claim that date, so disclosures in between can't be used against them. It only covers what the first application actually disclosed, so improvements need filing too.
Both, but differently. A pending application signals intent, capability and a secured priority date. A granted patent is an enforceable asset, and many investors weight it more heavily. What matters most is a coherent IP strategy that links the filings to the product, the market and the growth plan.