Garden is a patent-intelligence platform used by patent litigators, prosecutors, and in-house IP teams for prior-art search, invalidity analysis, infringement/evidence-of-use work, claim charts, and office-action response support. The strongest corroboration is current rather than historical: Garden announced a $150 million merger with SIM IP on 2026-02-05 while continuing to operate under the Garden brand, and Qdrant’s May 9, 2025 case study says Garden scaled to 200M+ patents and product documents, sub-100ms p95 query latency, and a new infringement-analysis revenue line. Public web evidence is light outside vendor-adjacent sources, but the workflow fit is specific and clearly practitioner-facing in patent prosecution and patent litigation.
Company Info
- Founded: 2022
- Team size: 51-200 employees
- Funding: $6.8M
- HQ: United States
- Sector: IP
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, Garden is used in these workflows:
What practitioners struggle with
Real frustrations from legal professionals — the problems Garden 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
Litigation team preparing a patent invalidity defence needs to find prior art that anticipates or renders obvious each claim element — manually building claim charts across dozens of references takes weeks and costs $50-100K in associate time, and missing one key reference could lose the case
Patent prosecution attorney receives an office action and needs to decide whether to fight, amend, or appeal — but has no data on this specific examiner's grant rate, allowance patterns, or appeal success rate, so the strategy decision comes down to gut feel instead of evidence, and a wrong call burns through the client's prosecution budget on a losing strategy
In-house IP team asked to evaluate whether a new product infringes competitor patents — evidence-of-use analysis requires manually comparing product features against hundreds of patent claims, which takes weeks of attorney time at $500/hour and still produces incomplete results
Community Data
Loading practitioner-sourced data…