Intellectual Property Expert

$90–100/hrrate as listed

Mercor is contracting senior IP practitioners to build evaluation scenarios and grading rubrics for AI systems working in patent prosecution, licensing, and enforcement. Work splits into a US track (35 U.S.C., MPEP, USPTO practice) and an International track (EPC, PCT, WIPO), and you can qualify for either or both.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

You are not answering IP questions for a chatbot — you are constructing the problem sets that measure whether a model can act like senior IP counsel. A typical task starts with a scenario you design from scratch: a continuation strategy for a crowded semiconductor portfolio, a §103 rejection with a questionable motivation-to-combine, an EPO Article 123(2) added-matter problem, a freedom-to-operate review before a product launch, or a cross-border license with field-of-use carve-outs and improvement clauses. You then draft the reference output a competent practitioner would produce — an office action response, claim chart, patentability opinion, litigation memorandum, or license term sheet — and write a rubric that specifies exactly where a weaker answer goes wrong.

The rubric is the hard part. Generic checklists reward bar-exam recall; useful rubrics penalize the specific failure modes of confident models: claim construction untethered from the intrinsic record, prior art analysis that ignores what the reference actually enables, procedural advice that misses a deadline or an available petition route, indemnity language that reads fine but shifts risk the wrong direction.

What the screen looks for

Verifiable practice history: portfolios you prosecuted, matters you owned, negotiations you led — not exposure by proximity.
Depth under follow-up. Expect the AI interviewer to push on a case you describe until it reaches procedure-level detail (RCE vs. appeal reasoning, divisional timing under Rule 36 EPC, IDS obligations, PCT national-phase mechanics).
Credential specificity: bar admission plus USPTO registration number, or European Patent Attorney qualification / equivalent.
Evaluation judgment — whether you can articulate what separates a defensible answer from a merely fluent one.

Logistics

Fully remote, asynchronous, contractor engagement. Contributors commonly work 10–20 hours per week against task batches with their own deadlines rather than fixed shifts; some engagements scale up during active project windows. The observed pay band for this listing is $90–100/hr, set by track and depth of qualification — treat it as observed, not guaranteed. Tooling familiarity (PatSnap, Innography, PatFT/Patent Public Search, Anaqua, CPA Global, claim-charting workflows) helps you build realistic scenarios but is not itself the credential being tested.

What they look for

5+ years as an IP attorney or patent agent at a major IP firm or corporate IP department
USPTO patent bar registration with state bar admission, or European Patent Attorney qualification
Direct ownership of patent prosecution portfolios, licensing negotiations, or IP litigation matters
Working command of 35 U.S.C./MPEP/Federal Circuit precedent or EPC/PCT/WIPO procedure
Ability to draft reference work product: office action responses, FTO opinions, claim charts, license agreements
Rubric, training-material, or CLE authorship experience (plus a technical/STEM degree) preferred

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you hold a Juris Doctor degree and active bar admission in a US state, or an equivalent legal qualification (such as a European Patent Attorney certificate, registered patent agent credential, or foreign lawyer qualification)?
IP Law Credential · required
Have you worked as an IP attorney, patent agent, or IP counsel for at least 5 years in a law firm or corporate IP department?
5+ Years IP Practice · required
Have you personally owned or led a patent prosecution matter from filing through prosecution or abandonment (not merely assisted under supervision)?
Patent Prosecution Ownership · required
Do you have direct experience with US patent prosecution (35 U.S.C., MPEP, USPTO procedure) or international patent procedure (EPO, PCT, WIPO treaties), or both?
USPTO or International Patent System Knowledge · required
Have you used patent search platforms (such as PatSnap, Innography, or USPTO PatFT) and/or IP docketing systems (such as Anaqua or CPA Global) in your professional work?
IP Tools Proficiency · preferred
Do you hold a degree or have professional experience in a STEM field (engineering, science, computer science, or similar)?
Technical Background (STEM) · preferred

0 of 6 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 10 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether the candidate has genuine hands-on prosecution experience, not just exposure. Can they discuss real claim strategy, office action responses, and the judgment calls that distinguish experienced counsel from junior associates.
A strong answer: The answer names a specific technical field, describes a concrete prosecution problem (anticipation rejection, written description objection, claim scope trade-off), shows how they diagnosed and responded to it, and reflects judgment about when to amend versus argue versus appeal.
Where people lose it: Vague answers ('I've done a lot of patent work') or recitation of procedure without judgment. Describing only what junior associates do (drafting under supervision) rather than owning the strategic decisions. Confusing prosecution mechanics with actual prosecution experience.