Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The purpose of the inventive step, or non-obviousness, requirement is to avoid granting patents for inventions which only follow from "normal product design and development", to achieve a proper balance between the incentive provided by the patent system, namely encouraging innovation, and its social cost, namely conferring temporary monopolies. [4]
In order to reduce the impact of non-obviousness on patentability, to eliminate the flash of genius test, and to provide a more fair and practical way to determine whether the invention disclosure deserves a patent monopoly, the Congress took the matter in its own hands and enacted the Patent Act of 1952 35 U.S.C. Section § 103 reads:
The non-obviousness criterion can be easily met, if a claim is based on a discovery of new natural phenomenon/principle/law. In the patentable subject matter analysis, however, this "discovery" is assumed to be prior art, and an "additional inventive concept" must be present in the claim.
Teleflex described how obviousness should be determined: In determining whether the subject matter of a patent claim is obvious, neither the particular motivation nor the avowed purpose of the patentee controls. What matters is the objective reach of the claim. If the claim extends to what is obvious, it is invalid under §103.
Prior art (also known as state of the art [1] or background art [2]) is a concept in patent law used to determine the patentability of an invention, in particular whether an invention meets the novelty and the inventive step or non-obviousness criteria for patentability.
The all elements rule or all limitations rule (often written with a hyphen after "all") is a legal test used in US patent law to determine whether a given reference shows that a patent claim [1] lacks the novelty required to be valid. The rule is also applicable to an obviousness analysis. [2]
Kim Kardashian turned heads in a sultry backless look for her latest red carpet moment.. The reality star, 44, stepped out to the Fourth Annual Fifteen Percent Pledge Gala in Los Angeles on ...
In United States patent law, an obviousness rejection based on a single reference. Generally a case for an obviousness rejection requires the examiner to rely on 2 or more references. Sandor Obviousness stems from Ex Parte Sandor Nagy [61] where the examiner relied on only a single reference to reject the claims at issue. Ultimately the case ...