Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (3)
When determining whether a reference is in the “same field of endeavor” as the claimed invention, examiners should consider:
- Explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application
- The embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention
The MPEP states: “When determining whether the ‘relevant field of endeavor’ test is met, the examiner should consider ‘explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application, including the embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention.’” (MPEP 2141.01(a))
Examiners must consider the disclosure of each reference “in view of the ‘the reality of the circumstances’” and weigh these circumstances “from the vantage point of the common sense likely to be exerted by one of ordinary skill in the art in assessing the scope of the endeavor.”
To learn more:
The “field of endeavor test” is one of the criteria used to determine if a reference qualifies as analogous art. According to MPEP 2141.01(a):
“Under the field of endeavor test, if the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, irrespective of the problem addressed, then the reference is analogous art.”
This test focuses on whether the reference and the claimed invention are in the same technical field, regardless of the specific problem being solved. It’s important to note that the field of endeavor should be defined broadly to encompass the full scope of the inventor’s work.
To learn more:
The MPEP 2141.01(a) outlines two distinct tests for determining whether a reference qualifies as analogous art:
- Same Field of Endeavor Test: This test focuses on whether the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, even if it addresses a different problem.
- Reasonably Pertinent Test: This test examines whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention.
The MPEP emphasizes: “Note that ‘same field of endeavor’ and ‘reasonably pertinent’ are two separate tests for establishing analogous art; it is not necessary for a reference to fulfill both tests in order to qualify as analogous art.”
It’s important to note that a reference only needs to satisfy one of these tests to be considered analogous art. This allows for a broader consideration of prior art that may be relevant to the claimed invention.
To learn more:
MPEP 2141.01 – Scope And Content Of The Prior Art (1)
When determining whether a reference is in the “same field of endeavor” as the claimed invention, examiners should consider:
- Explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application
- The embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention
The MPEP states: “When determining whether the ‘relevant field of endeavor’ test is met, the examiner should consider ‘explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application, including the embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention.’” (MPEP 2141.01(a))
Examiners must consider the disclosure of each reference “in view of the ‘the reality of the circumstances’” and weigh these circumstances “from the vantage point of the common sense likely to be exerted by one of ordinary skill in the art in assessing the scope of the endeavor.”
To learn more:
MPEP 2141.01(A) – Analogous And Nonanalogous Art (2)
The “field of endeavor test” is one of the criteria used to determine if a reference qualifies as analogous art. According to MPEP 2141.01(a):
“Under the field of endeavor test, if the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, irrespective of the problem addressed, then the reference is analogous art.”
This test focuses on whether the reference and the claimed invention are in the same technical field, regardless of the specific problem being solved. It’s important to note that the field of endeavor should be defined broadly to encompass the full scope of the inventor’s work.
To learn more:
The MPEP 2141.01(a) outlines two distinct tests for determining whether a reference qualifies as analogous art:
- Same Field of Endeavor Test: This test focuses on whether the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, even if it addresses a different problem.
- Reasonably Pertinent Test: This test examines whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention.
The MPEP emphasizes: “Note that ‘same field of endeavor’ and ‘reasonably pertinent’ are two separate tests for establishing analogous art; it is not necessary for a reference to fulfill both tests in order to qualify as analogous art.”
It’s important to note that a reference only needs to satisfy one of these tests to be considered analogous art. This allows for a broader consideration of prior art that may be relevant to the claimed invention.
To learn more:
Patent Law (3)
When determining whether a reference is in the “same field of endeavor” as the claimed invention, examiners should consider:
- Explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application
- The embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention
The MPEP states: “When determining whether the ‘relevant field of endeavor’ test is met, the examiner should consider ‘explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application, including the embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention.’” (MPEP 2141.01(a))
Examiners must consider the disclosure of each reference “in view of the ‘the reality of the circumstances’” and weigh these circumstances “from the vantage point of the common sense likely to be exerted by one of ordinary skill in the art in assessing the scope of the endeavor.”
To learn more:
The “field of endeavor test” is one of the criteria used to determine if a reference qualifies as analogous art. According to MPEP 2141.01(a):
“Under the field of endeavor test, if the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, irrespective of the problem addressed, then the reference is analogous art.”
This test focuses on whether the reference and the claimed invention are in the same technical field, regardless of the specific problem being solved. It’s important to note that the field of endeavor should be defined broadly to encompass the full scope of the inventor’s work.
To learn more:
The MPEP 2141.01(a) outlines two distinct tests for determining whether a reference qualifies as analogous art:
- Same Field of Endeavor Test: This test focuses on whether the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, even if it addresses a different problem.
- Reasonably Pertinent Test: This test examines whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention.
The MPEP emphasizes: “Note that ‘same field of endeavor’ and ‘reasonably pertinent’ are two separate tests for establishing analogous art; it is not necessary for a reference to fulfill both tests in order to qualify as analogous art.”
It’s important to note that a reference only needs to satisfy one of these tests to be considered analogous art. This allows for a broader consideration of prior art that may be relevant to the claimed invention.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (3)
When determining whether a reference is in the “same field of endeavor” as the claimed invention, examiners should consider:
- Explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application
- The embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention
The MPEP states: “When determining whether the ‘relevant field of endeavor’ test is met, the examiner should consider ‘explanations of the invention’s subject matter in the patent application, including the embodiments, function, and structure of the claimed invention.’” (MPEP 2141.01(a))
Examiners must consider the disclosure of each reference “in view of the ‘the reality of the circumstances’” and weigh these circumstances “from the vantage point of the common sense likely to be exerted by one of ordinary skill in the art in assessing the scope of the endeavor.”
To learn more:
The “field of endeavor test” is one of the criteria used to determine if a reference qualifies as analogous art. According to MPEP 2141.01(a):
“Under the field of endeavor test, if the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, irrespective of the problem addressed, then the reference is analogous art.”
This test focuses on whether the reference and the claimed invention are in the same technical field, regardless of the specific problem being solved. It’s important to note that the field of endeavor should be defined broadly to encompass the full scope of the inventor’s work.
To learn more:
The MPEP 2141.01(a) outlines two distinct tests for determining whether a reference qualifies as analogous art:
- Same Field of Endeavor Test: This test focuses on whether the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, even if it addresses a different problem.
- Reasonably Pertinent Test: This test examines whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention.
The MPEP emphasizes: “Note that ‘same field of endeavor’ and ‘reasonably pertinent’ are two separate tests for establishing analogous art; it is not necessary for a reference to fulfill both tests in order to qualify as analogous art.”
It’s important to note that a reference only needs to satisfy one of these tests to be considered analogous art. This allows for a broader consideration of prior art that may be relevant to the claimed invention.
To learn more: