How does AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 define prior art for obviousness determinations?
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.
AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 relies on AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) to define prior art for both novelty and obviousness determinations. The MPEP states:
This means that if a document qualifies as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or (a)(2) and is not subject to an exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b), it can be used in an obviousness rejection under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103. However, it’s important to note that while a disclosure must enable those skilled in the art to make the invention to anticipate under 35 U.S.C. 102, a non-enabling disclosure can still be used as prior art for obviousness determinations under 35 U.S.C. 103.