How does the MPEP address changes in size, proportion, or shape in patent applications?
How does the MPEP address changes in size, proportion, or shape in patent applications?
The MPEP addresses changes in size, proportion, or shape in MPEP 2144.04(IV). This section provides legal precedents for considering such changes as obvious variations. Specifically:
- Changes in Size/Proportion: “Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.” – Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984)
- Changes in Shape: “The configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.” – In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
These precedents suggest that changes in size, proportion, or shape are generally not patentable unless they produce a new and unexpected result or solve a specific problem in a non-obvious way.
To learn more:
Topics:
MPEP 2100 - Patentability,
MPEP 2144.04 - Legal Precedent As Source Of Supporting Rationale,
Patent Law,
Patent Procedure