What is the relationship between inventive step and non-obviousness in PCT applications?

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based)BlueIron Update: 2024-09-27

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

In the context of PCT applications, inventive step and non-obviousness are essentially equivalent concepts. This is evident from the language used in MPEP 1878.01(a)(2), which refers to:

“For the purposes of Article 33(3), the relevant date for the consideration of inventive step (non-obviousness) is the date prescribed in Rule 64.1.”

The parenthetical use of “non-obviousness” alongside “inventive step” indicates that these terms are used interchangeably in PCT applications. Both concepts refer to the requirement that an invention must not be obvious to a person skilled in the art, given the prior art at the relevant date, to be patentable.

Tags: Inventive Step, non-obviousness, patentability criteria, PCT applications