Legal Definitions - obviousness

Obviousness in patent law refers to whether an invention would have been easily apparent to a person with ordinary skill in that particular field, considering all existing knowledge at the time the invention was made. If an invention is determined to be obvious, it cannot be patented.

In patent law, obviousness refers to the quality of an invention being so apparent or predictable that it would have been easily conceived by a person with ordinary skill in the relevant technical field, given all existing public knowledge (known as "prior art") at the time the invention was made. If an invention is determined to be obvious, it lacks the necessary inventive step required for patent protection, meaning it does not offer a sufficiently new or non-trivial solution to a problem.

Here are some examples to illustrate the concept of obviousness:

• Example 1: Combining Known Features

  Imagine an inventor seeks a patent for a new type of backpack that includes a built-in USB charging port connected to a small solar panel on the exterior. While this might be a convenient product, a patent examiner might argue it is obvious. Backpacks are well-known, as are portable solar chargers and USB charging ports. A person with ordinary skill in product design, aware of these existing technologies, would likely find it a straightforward and predictable combination to integrate them into a backpack for convenience, rather than a truly inventive leap.

• Example 2: Substituting Known Materials

  Consider a company applying for a patent on a new type of food storage container made from a specific biodegradable plastic. If this particular biodegradable plastic is already widely known and used in other packaging applications (e.g., disposable cutlery, shopping bags) and its properties (durability, food safety) are well-understood, the patent office might deem the invention obvious. A person skilled in materials science or food packaging would readily understand that this known, suitable material could be used for a food storage container without any unexpected technical challenges or surprising benefits, making the substitution an obvious design choice.

• Example 3: Applying a Known Technique to a Similar Problem

  Suppose an inventor develops a new method for cleaning industrial machinery using a specific type of high-pressure water jet technology. If this exact high-pressure water jet technology is already commonly used and known in the prior art for cleaning other types of equipment (e.g., vehicles, building exteriors), and the industrial machinery presents no unique challenges that would require an inventive adaptation of the technology, the invention could be considered obvious. A person skilled in industrial cleaning techniques, aware of the existing applications of high-pressure water jets, would likely find it an expected and straightforward application of a known solution to a similar cleaning problem.