Embed Notice

@inthehands Good question.

At a high level:
Novelty = new
Nonobvious = new enough

The maxim they are citing here says that there should be symmetry between infringement (scope) and anticipation (novelty). In other words, if something looks similar enough to infringe, it's also similar enough to anticipate.

Obviousness is different. The whole idea of obviousness is that there are some prior designs that aren't close enough to anticipate but should still invalidate.