What is the “rationale to support a conclusion of obviousness” in patent examination?
The “rationale to support a conclusion of obviousness” in patent examination refers to the reasoning an examiner must provide when rejecting a claim as obvious. According to MPEP 2142:
“[T]he examiner bears the initial burden of factually supporting any prima facie conclusion of obviousness. If the examiner does not produce a prima facie case, the applicant is under no obligation to submit secondary evidence to show nonobviousness.”
This rationale must be clearly articulated and based on the teachings of the prior art, the nature of the problem to be solved, or the knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the art. The examiner must explain why the claimed invention would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
To learn more: