Legal Definitions - Section 103 rejection

A Section 103 rejection refers to a specific type of refusal issued by a patent examiner during the review of a patent application in the United States. It means that the invention described in the patent application is considered "obvious" in light of existing knowledge, often referred to as "prior art."

Under U.S. patent law (35 U.S.C. § 103), an invention cannot be patented if "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains." In simpler terms, if someone with average expertise in the relevant field could have easily come up with the invention by combining or modifying existing technologies or ideas, then it is considered obvious and not eligible for a patent.

Here are some examples illustrating a Section 103 rejection:

• Example 1: Mechanical Device

  An inventor applies for a patent on a new type of umbrella that includes a small LED light embedded in the handle. The patent examiner might issue a Section 103 rejection if there are existing patents or publications showing umbrellas with handles, and also existing products (like flashlights or keychains) that feature small LED lights. The examiner could argue that it would have been obvious to a person skilled in product design to combine a known umbrella with a known LED light source, especially if the combination simply provides the expected function of both elements without any new or surprising result.

• Example 2: Software Method

  A software company seeks a patent for a new method of organizing digital photos that automatically sorts them into folders based on the date they were taken. A Section 103 rejection could be issued if prior art demonstrates existing software that can read photo metadata (including creation dates) and existing operating system functions that allow files to be sorted into folders. The examiner might contend that merely automating the process of sorting files by a known metadata field would be obvious to a software developer familiar with file management and image processing.

• Example 3: Chemical Composition

  A researcher applies for a patent on a new cleaning solution that combines a known disinfectant (e.g., bleach) with a known fragrance enhancer (e.g., lemon oil). If both components are already widely used in cleaning products and their combined effect is merely the sum of their individual known properties (disinfection and a pleasant smell), a Section 103 rejection might be issued. The examiner could argue that it would be obvious to a chemist or product formulator to combine two well-known ingredients for their established functions, particularly if there are no unexpected synergistic effects or novel applications.