How does the Art Recognized Suitability doctrine apply to different fields of invention?
The Art Recognized Suitability doctrine applies across various fields of invention, but its application may vary depending on the specific technological area. The principle remains the same: selecting a known material or component for its known purpose can be considered obvious. However, the complexity of the field and the level of skill of a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) can influence how the doctrine is applied.
For example:
- Chemical and Materials Science: As seen in the Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp. case, selecting known solvents with specific properties for inks can be considered obvious.
- Mechanical Engineering: The Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp. case shows that substituting one known type of brake mechanism for another can be obvious.
- Electrical and Computer Engineering: Selecting known components or algorithms for their known functions in a circuit or software application might be considered obvious under this doctrine.
The MPEP 2144.07 emphasizes that this doctrine is not limited to specific fields, stating: “Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle.” This analogy suggests that the principle can be broadly applied across different technological domains.
To learn more: