Can these methods also be used to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection?

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based)BlueIron Update: 2024-09-30

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.

Yes, the methods used to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) rejection can also be used to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection that is based on 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) prior art.

MPEP 2152.06 explicitly states: “Note that all of the ways of overcoming a 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) rejection mentioned in this subsection may also be used to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection that is based on 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) prior art.

This means that benefit claims, priority claims, affidavits or declarations under 37 CFR 1.130, and establishing common ownership or a Joint Research Agreement can all be used to address both 102 and 103 rejections based on the same prior art.

Topics: MPEP 2100 - Patentability MPEP 2152.06 - Overcoming A 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) Or 102(A)(2) Rejection Patent Law Patent Procedure
Tags: Aia Practice, Design Prior Art Types, Patented Prior Art, Prior Art 102a1, Section 102