Document Management

#47 rlegaltech500

Cypris

Est. 2023 United States Updated 2026-02-10
Unverified by r/legaltech members — this page is based on publicly available information, not hands-on testing or practitioner feedback. Verify your experience with Cypris

AI-powered enterprise R&D intelligence platform for patent search, landscape analysis, and innovation monitoring. Core capabilities: unified access to 500M+ patents and 270M+ scientific papers from 150+ countries, AI patent landscape analysis, prior art search automation, Cypris Q AI research agent for comprehensive report generation, Innovation Dashboard with real-time competitive intelligence, and multimodal search (patents, papers, images). Founded 2021 by Steve Hafif and Amir Achourie, headquartered in New York. $11M total funding ($5.3M venture round led by Vocap Partners). SOC 2 Type II certified. G2: 4.7/5 (3 reviews). Competitors: PatSnap (#1 incumbent), Questel Orbit, Derwent Innovation (Clarivate), Relecura, Google Patents. Primarily serves enterprise R&D and innovation teams, not IP law firms directly — though IP attorneys use it for prior art search and patent landscape analysis. MODERATE LEGAL RELEVANCE: IP practitioners (patent attorneys, in-house IP counsel) interact with patent data that Cypris surfaces, but primary users are R&D teams.

Company Info

  • Founded: 2023
  • Team size: 11-50 employees
  • Funding: $11M
  • HQ: United States
  • Sector: Marketing & Intake, Knowledge Management

What We Haven’t Verified

This page was assembled from publicly available information. Feature claims and workflow mappings are based on what the vendor and third-party listings publish — not hands-on testing or practitioner feedback.

Workflows

Based on practitioner evidence, Cypris is used in these workflows:

What practitioners struggle with

Real frustrations from legal professionals — the problems Cypris addresses (or should address). Sourced from practitioner reviews, Reddit threads, and case studies.

Patent attorney conducting a prior art search for a client's invention spends 2-3 days manually searching USPTO, EPO, and non-patent literature databases — reading hundreds of abstracts, mapping claims to prior art references, and still worrying they missed something in a Chinese or Japanese patent that wasn't translated. The search costs the client $5,000-15,000 and the attorney still can't guarantee completeness

Research & Analysis 34 vendors affected ip-attorney · patent-agent · patent-attorney · associate

R&D team submits invention disclosures into a black box — they never hear back about patent decisions, don't understand why some inventions get filed and others don't, and eventually stop submitting because the process feels pointless

Client & Matter Lifecycle 14 vendors affected inhouse-enterprise · legal-ops · in-house-counsel · In-house counsel

Where it fits in your workflow

Community Data

Loading practitioner-sourced data…