When can multiple references be used in a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-30 10 Rules 5 Related FAQs This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice. While normally only one reference should be used in a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection, multiple references can be used in specific circumstances. According to MPEP 2131.01 , multiple references are proper when the extra references are cited to: (A) Prove the primary reference contains an “enabled disclosure;” (B) Explain the meaning of a term used in the primary reference; or (C) Show that a characteristic not disclosed in the reference is inherent. These circumstances allow for a more comprehensive analysis of the prior art while maintaining the integrity of the anticipation rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 10 rules Collapse Proper Use of Multiple References in 35 U.S.C. 102 Rejections MPEP 2131.01 Recommended Multiple References Allowed to Prove Enabled Disclosure MPEP 2131.01 Requirement for Showing Characteristic Not Disclosed is Inherent MPEP 2131.01 Additional Reference for Enabled Disclosure MPEP 2131.01 Permitted Claim Must Be Fully Disclosed In One Reference MPEP 2131 Compound Disclosure Requires Utility Evidence MPEP 2131.01 Invention Must Not Be Anticipated by Prior Art MPEP 2131 Permitted Claim Must Be Anticipated Over Prior Art MPEP 2131 Nonanalogous Prior Art Does Not Invalidate Section 102 Rejection MPEP 2131.05 Elements Must Match Claim Order MPEP 2131 Required Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse What is an &#8220;enabled disclosure&#8221; in the context of 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections? How can extrinsic evidence be used to support a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection? Can extrinsic evidence expand the meaning of terms in a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection? How can inherent characteristics be shown in a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection? How does anticipation a...