What is the significance of the ‘arranged as in the claim’ requirement for anticipation?
What is the significance of the ‘arranged as in the claim’ requirement for anticipation?
The ‘arranged as in the claim’ requirement is a crucial aspect of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102. This requirement means that the prior art reference must not only disclose all elements of the claimed invention but also present them in the same configuration or arrangement as in the claim. The MPEP 2131 emphasizes this point:
“The identical invention must be shown in as complete detail as is contained in the … claim.”
The significance of this requirement includes:
- Ensuring that the prior art truly discloses the exact invention being claimed, not just its individual components.
- Preventing anticipation rejections based on prior art that contains all elements but in a different arrangement or configuration.
- Maintaining a high standard for novelty rejections, as the invention must be identically disclosed in a single reference.
- Distinguishing between anticipation (35 U.S.C. 102) and obviousness (35 U.S.C. 103) rejections.
Examiners must carefully analyze the arrangement and configuration of elements in both the claim and the prior art reference when considering anticipation rejections. If the elements are present but arranged differently, the reference may be relevant for an obviousness rejection but would not support an anticipation rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102.
To learn more: