Kickstart your patenting process and receive an assessment within 60 days.
3.32 The prior art is read through the eyes of the person skilled in the art, and as a consequence the implicit features of a document may also be taken into account for novelty purposes. Thus, if the person skilled in the art would read a disclosure as including a particular feature without it being specifically mentioned it would be considered an implicit feature of that disclosure.
3.33 The teaching must be such that it would be understood by a person skilled in the art reading in the light of common general knowledge – available at the date of the disclosure – special knowledge must not be required in order for the matter to be understood (H.Lundbeck A/S v Norpharma SpA  RPC 23). The prior art document must be construed at the date of the disclosure and not in light of the subsequent patent (SmithKline Beecham Plc’s (Paroxetine Methanesulfonate) Patent  RPC 10).
3.34 For example the disclosure of a control arrangement for the cooling system of an internal combustion engine might not refer to the presence of a radiator or other heat exchanger in the system, but it is common knowledge that this is necessary. A novelty objection could therefore be raised even if a citation did not specify this feature. In contrast, it may be a common practice for the radiator to be mounted in front of the engine, but this is not necessarily always the case. In this situation, a novelty objection cannot be raised based on a citation that does not specifically disclose this feature. An objection of obviousness would then be appropriate.