What exactly is a three-step method?

When people use the three-step method to answer questions, they usually make a mistake: they regard the "judgment basis" as the "judgment rule", and the three-step method is the judgment basis, but each step in the three-step method, especially the third step, what is "inspiration" and what is "motivation" is not explained in the three-step method, which leaves a lot of room for explanation.

In fact, most laws are like this. The cited laws and regulations you see are the basis, not the actual rules. For example, you can be awarded punitive damages according to your subjective malice, but there are different opinions about what is subjective malice, depending on how the court decides.

One meaning of the three-step method is only to judge its obvious basis, not the practical rules (at least not the thorough practical rules). The core of the three-step method is the third step, which has two parallel cores: the combination of the existing technology and the nearest existing technology and the motivation of those skilled in the art to apply the existing technology to the nearest existing technology. These two sentences are connected by "namely", that is, the two cores are equivalent. Then, as long as you destroy any core, "obvious" is not absolutely true. If it is not absolutely true, then you can't say that you are not creative in the spirit of "no doubt".

So in my opinion, the three-step method or obvious judgment is a very loose scale. It is said that American patent examination is easy to authorize, but this loose scale is obvious.

But back to reality, the actual patent examination in China is more strict. There is no strict official operation manual to define this strictness, which may exist inside the examiner and cannot be made public. Therefore, patent examination is essentially a legal reasoning, not a technical discussion.

This passage is quoted from? /thread- 1 104955- 1- 1 . html？