Graham Factors Analysis of Obviousness

All of this preliminary material sets the stage for the crux of our present inquiry, What is obvious This is a key inquiry for patent law and one of the most crucial yet challenging concepts to understand because its meaning goes to the core of the definition of inventiveness. We have seen and reviewed novelty and should well understand its predicates. Unlike novelty, however, obviousness is a much more open-ended inquiry. Whereas novelty instructed us that we were limited to a single reference, obviousness can be based on information separately incorporated from 

14Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp., 314 U.S. 84 (1941). 

Ascertain the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art. 

We shall discuss each of these in turn (note that the sequence of examining these four factors may be different in various cases, but each factor will be considered). 

17The USPTO follows the Graham four-step process in its examination of patents for obviousness. See MPEP 904.02 for a description of the USPTO search guidelines. Note that for some arts, such as the chemical arts, the USPTO recommends that its examiners, who likely hold advanced degrees, still use the services of USPTO personnel specifically trained in specialized tools for searching the chemical arts. 

---