How does MPEP treat optimization of ranges through routine experimentation?
How does MPEP treat optimization of ranges through routine experimentation? The MPEP addresses the optimization of ranges through routine experimentation in section 2144.05. According to this guidance: “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” This…
Read MoreHow does MPEP address the obviousness of similar proportions or amounts?
How does MPEP address the obviousness of similar proportions or amounts? The MPEP addresses the obviousness of similar proportions or amounts in section 2144.05. According to this guidance: “Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or…
Read MoreWhat is the relationship between criticality and obviousness in patent law?
Criticality plays a crucial role in rebutting obviousness rejections, particularly in cases involving ranges or amounts. According to MPEP 2144.05: “Applicants can rebut a prima facie case of obviousness by showing the criticality of the range. ‘The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is…
Read More