Le Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) a publié un guide à l’intention des Examinateurs pour les aider à prendre les bonnes décisions dans l’examen de revendications en ce qui à trait qu critère d’évidence. Ce guide fait suite à la décision KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) (KSR).
Selon la dépêche du USPTO:
“The Guidelines stress that the familiar factual inquiries announced by the Supreme Court in its much earlier decision, Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), remain the basis for every decision regarding obviousness,†noted Commissioner for Patents John Doll. “That is, patent examiners will continue to consider (1) the scope and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art, (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and (4) objective evidence relevant to the issue of obviousness.â€
The Guidelines also note that patent examiners must continue to explain the reasoning that leads to a legal conclusion of obviousness when rejecting claims on that ground. The reasoning may still include the established Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit standard that a claimed invention may be obvious if the examiner identifies a prior art teaching, suggestion, or motivation (TSM) to make it. However, in keeping with the KSR decision, the Guidelines explain that there is no requirement that patent examiners use the TSM approach in order to make a proper obviousness rejection. Furthermore, the Guidelines point out that even if the TSM approach cannot be applied to a claimed invention, that invention may still be found obvious.