MPEP Chapter 2100 — Patentability
Patentability requirements, including eligibility, novelty, obviousness, and written description.
About this document
This page indexes an official USPTO reference PDF from the MPEP Ninth Edition, Revision 01.2024 collection. It is provided for convenient discovery and download. For the latest applicable USPTO guidance, use the official source linked on this page.
What this document covers
- §101 eligibility
- §102 novelty
- §103 obviousness
- §112 support
Related guides on this site
Your claims were rejected as obvious under §103
What a 103 obviousness rejection means, how examiners build one, the four ways of answering it, and what the reply period is.
One reference was cited against your whole claim: §102
What anticipation under 35 USC 102 means, when a reference qualifies as prior art, and the realistic ways of answering the rejection.
Your claims were called ineligible under §101
What a 35 USC 101 subject matter eligibility rejection means for software, diagnostics and business methods, and how these are answered.
The examiner objected to how your claims are written: §112
The difference between 112(a) written description and enablement and 112(b) indefiniteness, and how each is answered.
The four rejection grounds, told apart
What each section number in an Office Action means: 101 eligibility, 102 anticipation, 103 obviousness and 112 claim drafting.