Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (2)
What are the Graham factors in patent obviousness analysis?
The Graham factors, established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., are four key considerations used in determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. These factors are:
- The scope and content of the prior art
- The differences between the prior art and the claimed invention
- The level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art
- Objective evidence of nonobviousness (secondary considerations)
As stated in MPEP 2141: “The Graham factual inquiries … are to be considered when making a determination of obviousness.” Examiners must consider these factors when evaluating whether a claimed invention is obvious in light of the prior art.
To learn more:
What are secondary considerations in obviousness analysis?
Secondary considerations, also known as objective evidence of nonobviousness, are factors that can provide evidence against an obviousness rejection in patent examination. According to MPEP 2141:
“The examiner should consider all of the evidence in the record, including any objective indicia of nonobviousness presented by applicant.”
Common types of secondary considerations include:
- Commercial success of the invention
- Long-felt but unsolved needs addressed by the invention
- Failure of others to achieve the invention
- Unexpected results or properties
- Skepticism of experts
- Copying by others
- Licensing or praise by others in the field
The importance of secondary considerations is emphasized in MPEP 2141: “Evidence of secondary considerations may be relevant to the issue of obviousness, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.” When presented with such evidence, examiners must carefully consider it in the context of the Graham factors and the overall obviousness analysis.
To learn more:
MPEP 2141 – Examination Guidelines For Determining Obviousness Under 35 U.S.C. 103 (2)
What are the Graham factors in patent obviousness analysis?
The Graham factors, established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., are four key considerations used in determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. These factors are:
- The scope and content of the prior art
- The differences between the prior art and the claimed invention
- The level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art
- Objective evidence of nonobviousness (secondary considerations)
As stated in MPEP 2141: “The Graham factual inquiries … are to be considered when making a determination of obviousness.” Examiners must consider these factors when evaluating whether a claimed invention is obvious in light of the prior art.
To learn more:
What are secondary considerations in obviousness analysis?
Secondary considerations, also known as objective evidence of nonobviousness, are factors that can provide evidence against an obviousness rejection in patent examination. According to MPEP 2141:
“The examiner should consider all of the evidence in the record, including any objective indicia of nonobviousness presented by applicant.”
Common types of secondary considerations include:
- Commercial success of the invention
- Long-felt but unsolved needs addressed by the invention
- Failure of others to achieve the invention
- Unexpected results or properties
- Skepticism of experts
- Copying by others
- Licensing or praise by others in the field
The importance of secondary considerations is emphasized in MPEP 2141: “Evidence of secondary considerations may be relevant to the issue of obviousness, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.” When presented with such evidence, examiners must carefully consider it in the context of the Graham factors and the overall obviousness analysis.
To learn more:
Patent Law (2)
What are the Graham factors in patent obviousness analysis?
The Graham factors, established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., are four key considerations used in determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. These factors are:
- The scope and content of the prior art
- The differences between the prior art and the claimed invention
- The level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art
- Objective evidence of nonobviousness (secondary considerations)
As stated in MPEP 2141: “The Graham factual inquiries … are to be considered when making a determination of obviousness.” Examiners must consider these factors when evaluating whether a claimed invention is obvious in light of the prior art.
To learn more:
What are secondary considerations in obviousness analysis?
Secondary considerations, also known as objective evidence of nonobviousness, are factors that can provide evidence against an obviousness rejection in patent examination. According to MPEP 2141:
“The examiner should consider all of the evidence in the record, including any objective indicia of nonobviousness presented by applicant.”
Common types of secondary considerations include:
- Commercial success of the invention
- Long-felt but unsolved needs addressed by the invention
- Failure of others to achieve the invention
- Unexpected results or properties
- Skepticism of experts
- Copying by others
- Licensing or praise by others in the field
The importance of secondary considerations is emphasized in MPEP 2141: “Evidence of secondary considerations may be relevant to the issue of obviousness, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.” When presented with such evidence, examiners must carefully consider it in the context of the Graham factors and the overall obviousness analysis.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (2)
What are the Graham factors in patent obviousness analysis?
The Graham factors, established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., are four key considerations used in determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. These factors are:
- The scope and content of the prior art
- The differences between the prior art and the claimed invention
- The level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art
- Objective evidence of nonobviousness (secondary considerations)
As stated in MPEP 2141: “The Graham factual inquiries … are to be considered when making a determination of obviousness.” Examiners must consider these factors when evaluating whether a claimed invention is obvious in light of the prior art.
To learn more:
What are secondary considerations in obviousness analysis?
Secondary considerations, also known as objective evidence of nonobviousness, are factors that can provide evidence against an obviousness rejection in patent examination. According to MPEP 2141:
“The examiner should consider all of the evidence in the record, including any objective indicia of nonobviousness presented by applicant.”
Common types of secondary considerations include:
- Commercial success of the invention
- Long-felt but unsolved needs addressed by the invention
- Failure of others to achieve the invention
- Unexpected results or properties
- Skepticism of experts
- Copying by others
- Licensing or praise by others in the field
The importance of secondary considerations is emphasized in MPEP 2141: “Evidence of secondary considerations may be relevant to the issue of obviousness, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.” When presented with such evidence, examiners must carefully consider it in the context of the Graham factors and the overall obviousness analysis.
To learn more: