We always try to make our claims scopes as much generic as possible at the same time overtly generalized claims often fall under obviousness.

Is there any criteria or specific rules to measure a claim's obviousness and generalization scale? If so what are they?


Overly broad claims can run afoul of novelty and obviousness issues. How broad a claim you can get allowed and enforced is entirely based of the uniqueness of the invention in relation to the prior art. In a sense the scale is binary - rejected or allowed.

  • True. But its hard to trade off between. Where can I get the guidelines? Jul 30 '21 at 17:59
  • It really isn’t a matter of guidelines. There are rules for an examiner making obviousness rejection and there are grounds of rebuttal. See the MPEP for the rules the examiners are under. The strategies used in prosecution of patents by professionals change with every interesting federal circuit and SCOTUS case decision. It is a deep and subtle art.
    – George White
    Jul 30 '21 at 22:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.