Article 25, Paragraph 5 of the Patent Law stipulates that prior art refers to technology that is known to the public at home and abroad before the filing date. Section 2.1 of Chapter 3 of Part 2 of the "Examination Guidelines" explains that the existing technology should be in a state that is available to the public before the filing date and contain content that enables the public to obtain substantive technical knowledge. The technical content that is kept confidential does not belong to the existing technology.
If the product is used in space, if the use is a confidential experimental subject, then it should not be part of the existing technology. The current experiments in space should be confidential, right? Of course, with the development of technology in the future, the public will be able to go to space if they want to. In other words, if they want to know the technical content of the product, they should have some novelty in the patent application for the product.
Also, when the product was on the ground, was it ever in a state where the public could learn about its technical content? If so, it will affect the novelty of the product patent application.
The judgment of novelty does not distinguish whether it is a general patent, a confidential patent or a national defense patent. The standards should be unified.