Is it patentable?

You be the patent examiner.

Case #2 - Is a better mousetrap non-obvious?

An obvious way to improve a device is to make one of its parts better.

This seems like common sense. But what about making one of its parts worse?

That somehow seems wrong. And making something seem “wrong” is a good way to tee up a case for non-obviousness.

In this case, the device is a mousetrap; the component is the baitholder. Obviously, making the bait visible helps lure the prey. At least that’s how fishing lures seem to work. As a result, most mousetraps have a tray that exposes the bait.

This mousetrap does the opposite. It doesn’t expose the bait. It hides the bait, in this case peanut butter, deep in a well. So now, the mice can’t see it. But they can still smell it.

Eventually, an inquisitive mouse homes in on the well. It leans in for a quick taste. In doing so, the mouse transfers much of its weight forward. This helps trigger the trap. And with the mouse leaning into the well, it’s hard to make a quick getaway.

So in this case, making a part of the trap (i.e., the baitholder) ostensibly worse ends up making the mousetrap better.

To the extent this is unexpected, you are on your way to a patent.

There are some rebuttals of course. The examiner may point to nursery rhymes suggesting that mice are known to be blind anyway. But thus far at least, it remains rare for a patent examiner to rely on nursery rhymes for evidence.

Authenzo is a registered trademark of Shenzhen asos E-Commerce Ltd.

Disclaimer:

The O&R “Is it patentable?” blog is educational and provides general information about patent law.  It provides no legal advice or conclusions.  O&R uses publicly available information about the products described in these posts and has no relationship with the manufacturers, sellers, or distributors of these products.  Reading this blog and participating in voting on the case studies does not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader and O&R.