User talk:KDacey

Non-Obvious Argument

The thought of putting a hinge on the mechanism in question could be thought to be obvious, especially to someone skilled in the art. Someone skilled in the art would see that adding a hinge could add flexibility and better maneuverability. However, the way that the design of Mr Grahams hinge acted with the entire plow shows a great deal of time and testing that would not be obvious to someone skilled in the art without replicating his testing and careful design. The hinge also offers the plow a longer life cycle due to the ability to handle greater impact. This, along with other favorable outcomes of the addition of the hinge, makes the new design superior to older designs and worthy of a patent.

Obvious Argument

Any engineer or designer would have eventually come up with this improvement after use of the plow. After use, it would have become very obvious that the plow could use greater motion and would be better if it could handle greater impact. Hinges, an obvious prior art used in countless mechanisms, are designed and used for just such a purpose. To any person skilled in the art would have thought to put adjust the plows motion with a movable part, such as a hinge. Therefore, it is not worthy of a patent.