How does skepticism of experts relate to nonobviousness in patent law?
How does skepticism of experts relate to nonobviousness in patent law?
Skepticism of experts is a secondary consideration that can provide evidence of nonobviousness in patent law. According to MPEP 716.05, “Skepticism of experts is relevant to the issue of nonobviousness when the skepticism is directed to the invention as a whole, and not merely to minor details.” This means that if recognized experts in the field expressed doubt about the feasibility or effectiveness of an invention before it was made, this skepticism can be used as evidence that the invention was not obvious to those skilled in the art.
The rationale behind this consideration is that if experts in the field were skeptical about the invention’s possibility or success, it suggests that the invention was not readily apparent or predictable based on the existing knowledge in the field. This aligns with the fundamental principle of nonobviousness in patent law, which requires that an invention be more than just a predictable variation of prior art.
To learn more: