What is a Diversion Invention?A diversion invention refers to an invention created by applying prior art from one technical field to another technical field.
Evaluation Criteria for Inventiveness of Diversion Inventions
Section 4.4 of Chapter IV, Part II of the Guidelines for Patent Examination stipulates the factors to be considered in judging the inventiveness of a diversion invention, including:
the closeness of the technical fields of the diversion;
whether there is a corresponding technical enlightenment;
the difficulty of the diversion;
whether technical difficulties need to be overcome;
the technical effects brought about by the diversion.
At the same time, the evaluation of inventiveness must conform to the core requirement of patent inventiveness:
prominent substantive features and remarkable progress.
The specific rules are as follows:
1. The Closeness of the Technical Fields
Similar technical fields
If the diversion occurs in similar or closely related fields (e.g., applying the support structure of a cabinet to a table), the diversion is obvious to a person skilled in the art due to strong relevance.
Generally, it is deemed not inventive if no unexpected technical effect is achieved.
Distantly related technical fields
When the diversion spans greatly different fields, the motivation to obtain technical enlightenment is weak, and the evaluation requirements are more relaxed.
Such a diversion is likely to be inventive.
2. Whether There is Technical Enlightenment
Technical enlightenment means whether the prior art provides guidance for applying the technology to the target field.
If explicit teaching or suggestion exists in the closest prior art, the inventiveness is low.
If no relevant enlightenment is provided, and even the fields are unrelated, the diversion reflects the inventor’s independent exploration and supports inventiveness.
3. Difficulty of Diversion and Overcoming Technical Difficulties
If the diversion only requires simple replacement or modification without solving complex technical problems, inventiveness is low.
If the diversion involves solving new technical problems not encountered in the original field and requires substantial improvement, it proves inventiveness.
4. Technical Effects Brought by the Diversion
This is a key factor.
If the diversion only transfers the original effect without new breakthroughs, it is not inventive.
If unexpected effects are produced (e.g., significantly improved efficiency, reduced cost, expanded functions), it is inventive.
In practice, the technical problem solved after the diversion may also be considered.
If the diversion raises a new technical problem that does not exist in the original field, and the invention is designed to solve it, this also supports inventiveness.
