How does implicit disclosure affect the novelty and obviousness of an invention?
Implicit disclosure plays a crucial role in determining the novelty and obviousness of an invention. When examining prior art, patent examiners consider both explicit teachings and implicit disclosures. As per MPEP 2144.01, “it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.”
This means that an invention may lack novelty or be considered obvious not just based on what is explicitly stated in prior art, but also on what is implicitly disclosed or reasonably inferred. For example, in the In re Preda case, a process at “about 750-830°C” was found to be anticipated by a reference teaching 700°C because the reference implicitly suggested the possibility of higher temperatures.
To learn more: