[Patentpractice] Rejection under “102 or 103”

[Stanley H. Kremen]

Colleagues:

Examiner rejects claim as anticipated by single prior art reference in under 35 USC 102 or obvious over the same reference under 35 USC 103. 

The 102 rejection is understandable, and it can be overcome by showing that the single reference does not teach every element of the claim. 

However, how do we deal with the obviousness rejection? There is only a single reference. There is no explanation of the basis for 103. Is it the examiner relying on the Doctrine of Equivalence?

Stan Kremen

Sent from my iPhone