When you’re building something new, exciting, and maybe even a little world-changing, the last thing you want is a legal wall slowing you down. But if you’re filing for a patent in the U.S., you might run into something called a rejection. It can feel scary, like someone saying, “No, you can’t protect this.” But the truth is, most rejections are just part of the process—and you can overcome them. The key is knowing what kind of rejection you’re dealing with.
What is a 101 Rejection?
The big idea: Is your idea the kind of thing you can patent?
Let’s start with 101. If your patent application gets a 101 rejection, the examiner is basically saying, “This isn’t something we allow patents for.”
It’s not about whether your idea is new. It’s not about whether someone else did it first. It’s just about the kind of thing your idea is.
And in some cases, the answer is: this isn’t the kind of stuff the law protects.
That can feel confusing, because you’re clearly solving a problem. You’ve written code. You’ve made something that works.
But 101 isn’t asking whether it works. It’s asking what kind of problem you’re solving—and whether that problem fits into the patent world.
In plain terms, 101 rejections happen when the examiner thinks your idea is too abstract. They think it’s just a rule, or a calculation, or a general concept that could apply to lots of things.
The law doesn’t want to give a patent on a basic rule of nature, or on something anyone could do just by thinking about it. So they’re strict about what counts.
Why software gets hit with 101 rejections
If you’re a software founder, this hits close to home. Software patents often get 101 pushback.
Not because software isn’t valuable—it is—but because the way software works can sometimes feel like just “doing math on a computer.”
If your claim looks like “doing something people already do, but now using a computer,” that’s where the examiner might say: nope, this is just an abstract idea.
But that doesn’t mean you can’t patent software. You just need to frame it right.
The trick is to show that your software isn’t just a concept—it’s a specific solution to a real technical problem.
You need to show that your invention improves the way computers work or handles data in a new, better, or more technical way.
Not just that it does something “faster” or “better,” but that it solves a real computing challenge in a technical way.
Here’s a way to think about it: is your idea something only a computer could do? If yes, you’re on stronger ground.
If it’s something people could do in their heads, or with pen and paper, then the examiner might say: sorry, that’s too abstract.
How to respond to a 101 rejection
The good news is, a 101 rejection is not the end. It’s more like a “try again, but explain it better.”
You don’t have to invent something new. You just need to help the examiner see your invention the right way.
This is where the words matter. A lot.
You want to highlight the technical problem you’re solving. Show how your invention improves a computer’s function. Be specific.
Point to the steps your system performs that a person couldn’t do alone. Talk about how your solution makes something possible that wasn’t possible before—on a technical level.
Sometimes, this means rewriting your claims. Other times, it just means reframing your description. Either way, the fix is in the story you tell.
And this is where having smart patent help can save you time.
Because the right words, the right framing, the right strategy—it can mean the difference between a rejection that drags for months and a patent that sails through.
So if you get a 101 rejection, don’t panic. You’re not alone. This is one of the most common hurdles for software founders. And it’s beatable—with the right approach.
What is a 102 Rejection?
The big idea: Someone else already did it
Let’s move to 102. This one hits hard, because it means the examiner thinks your invention is not new. In patent language, that’s called “not novel.”
What they’re saying is: we found something else, already out there, that does exactly what you’re trying to patent.
That “something else” could be another patent. It could be a research paper. It could be a product on the market.
If it was public before you filed your patent, and it describes your invention in full, that’s grounds for a 102 rejection.
This is different from 101. 101 says “this type of thing isn’t patentable.” 102 says, “nice idea, but someone beat you to it.”
And that hurts, especially if you didn’t copy anyone. You might have built your invention from scratch, with no idea someone else had already done something similar.
But the patent office doesn’t care whether you saw it before. They only care whether it was out there.
How exact does it have to be?
A 102 rejection is strict. The examiner has to show a single reference—a single piece of prior art—that matches every part of your claim.
That means every step, every feature, every detail. If even one element is missing, it’s not a valid 102 rejection.
So the first thing to do when you get hit with a 102 is: read it carefully.
Look at what they’re comparing your invention to. Does that old document really describe everything in your claim? Or did the examiner stretch it a little?
Sometimes, they do. Examiners are human. They might interpret something in a way that sounds close, but isn’t quite the same.
If you can show that their reference is missing even one key part of your claim, you can push back.
And even if it’s close, you might be able to tweak your claim. Add a detail that sets your invention apart.
Clarify something that the prior art doesn’t do. You don’t have to abandon your idea. You just have to make it more clearly yours.
How to avoid a 102 in the first place
This is where early research matters. Before you file your patent, it helps to do a search. See what’s out there.
Look at old patents, articles, products. Not to scare yourself off—but to get smart. The more you know about the landscape, the better you can shape your claims.
It also helps to file sooner. The U.S. is now a “first to file” country.
That means the first person to file a patent on an idea gets the rights—even if someone else invented it first but waited. So moving fast can make all the difference.
And if you’re working on something truly new, filing early helps you draw a line in the sand. You get your place in line. You protect your spot.
A 102 rejection is serious, but it’s not always fatal. It’s a sign that you need to be clearer, more specific, or slightly different.
And sometimes, a small change is all it takes to get back on track.
What is a 103 Rejection?
The big idea: Your invention is too obvious
Now let’s talk about 103. This one’s tricky—because it’s not saying your invention already exists.
And it’s not saying it’s the wrong kind of idea. What it’s saying is: “Sure, this might be new. But it’s obvious.”
That can feel like a slap. After all, you spent time, energy, maybe even years building something. You solved a real problem.
You made it work. And now someone is saying, “Yeah, but anyone could’ve come up with that.”
That’s the heart of a 103 rejection.
It’s called an “obviousness” rejection.
And it comes from the idea that the patent system should only reward real innovation—not stuff that would’ve been obvious to someone with basic skills in your field.
How 103 works
Here’s how it usually plays out.
The examiner finds a few older documents—maybe one, maybe two or three—that together cover most of what your invention does. Not all in one place (that would be 102), but close.
Then they argue that someone skilled in your field could have taken those older ideas, combined them, and ended up with what you created.
In other words: your invention is just a mash-up of stuff that was already out there.
That’s frustrating. Because in the real world, combining things isn’t always simple. Just because something could be combined doesn’t mean it would have been.
There might be thousands of possible combinations. But the examiner only needs one to make their argument.
That’s what makes 103 rejections so common—and so hard to fight. They’re based on judgment. Not strict rules. And that gives examiners a lot of leeway.
How to push back on a 103 rejection
Even though it’s harder to pin down, a 103 rejection can absolutely be overcome.
The key is to show why your invention isn’t just a simple or obvious combination. You need to highlight what’s unexpected, non-obvious, or better about your approach.
Maybe your invention solves a problem that no one else solved.
Maybe it works in a way that others wouldn’t have thought to try. Maybe there’s a technical barrier that makes your solution surprising.
The examiner can guess what a skilled person might have done—but you can show why your way isn’t something they would have thought of.
The more clearly you explain the problem you were solving, and how your solution goes beyond the usual thinking, the better your chances.
This is also where the way you write your claims really matters. If your claims are too broad or general, they’ll look obvious.
But if you make them more specific—if you include the steps, details, or design decisions that make your invention unique—you’ve got a stronger position.
When to tweak and when to stand firm
Sometimes, a 103 rejection just means you need to fine-tune your claims.
Maybe the core of your idea is solid, but you need to focus on the part that’s truly inventive. The sharp edge. The piece no one else had thought of.
Other times, you might have to explain things differently. Use your description to spell out the technical challenge you overcame.
Help the examiner understand that this isn’t just another tool or feature—it’s a smarter solution.
And in some cases, you might decide to narrow your focus. If your broad claim won’t fly, you can still protect the specific version you built. That’s often enough to keep competitors out.
At the end of the day, a 103 rejection is about judgment. And judgment can be challenged—with the right argument, the right strategy, and the right words.
This is where PowerPatent makes a real difference. Because you don’t have to fight these battles alone.
Our platform combines smart software with real patent attorneys who’ve seen hundreds of 103 rejections—and helped beat them.
You stay in control. You move fast. And you protect what matters.
👉 Want to see how it works? Go here: https://powerpatent.com/how-it-works
Why These Rejections Exist in the First Place
The system is built to filter, not to block
It helps to zoom out for a second. Why do these rejections even exist?
The short answer: not everything should be patented. The patent system gives inventors exclusive rights—but only when they’ve truly done something new and valuable.
That’s the deal. You share your invention with the world, and in return, you get protection. But to make that deal fair, the system has to be picky.
That’s where Sections 101, 102, and 103 come in. They’re filters. Each one asks a different question to make sure your invention passes the test.
101 asks: Is this the kind of thing we allow patents for?
102 asks: Has anyone else already done this?
103 asks: Is this just an obvious twist on something old?
These are real concerns. If patents were too easy to get, we’d all be stuck—unable to build, code, or create without bumping into someone else’s rights.
But when the filters are used the right way, they help protect real innovation while keeping the system open for future inventors.
The problem is, these rules aren’t always used clearly. Or fairly. Especially for software founders and startup builders.
That’s why understanding how they work—and how to respond—can save you months of stress and delay.
It’s not personal. But it is strategic.
One thing to keep in mind: when you get a rejection, it’s not a personal attack. The examiner isn’t saying your idea is bad. They’re not saying you’re wrong. They’re just applying a rule.
And they’re doing it based on what you gave them.
That’s why the way you write your patent matters. A lot. The examiner only sees what’s on the page. They don’t see your product.
They don’t know your roadmap. They don’t understand your strategy unless you spell it out—clearly, directly, and technically.
That’s what makes great patent drafting part art, part science. You’re telling a story. But you’re also building a case.
Every word is a piece of evidence. Every claim is a move on the chessboard.
So when you respond to a rejection, you’re not arguing. You’re teaching. You’re showing the examiner how to see your invention through your eyes.
And when you do it right, they get it. They see the value. They say yes.
👉 Want help crafting a response that wins? Check out how PowerPatent works: https://powerpatent.com/how-it-works
Early decisions shape everything
Here’s something most founders don’t realize: the risk of getting a rejection often comes down to how your patent was written on day one.
A vague description? You’re asking for a 101.
A broad claim with no backup? You’re likely to get a 102 or 103.
No technical detail? That’s a rejection waiting to happen.
But when you build your application with care—with a clear explanation of the problem, a detailed story of the solution, and smart claim strategy—you give yourself room to move.
You make it easier to respond. You avoid dead ends.
That’s why PowerPatent doesn’t just file documents. We help you tell the right story from the start.
With smart software to speed up the process. And real patent attorneys to guide every move.
So if you haven’t filed yet, now’s the time to do it right.
And if you’ve already filed and gotten a rejection, that’s okay. It’s fixable. Let’s keep going.
What Happens After You Get a Rejection?
This is normal—don’t panic
Let’s be super clear: rejections are part of the process. They’re not the end of the road.
In fact, most patent applications get at least one rejection before being approved. It doesn’t mean your invention isn’t valuable. It just means you’re in the game.
The patent examiner isn’t shutting you down. They’re saying, “We need more.” More detail. More clarity. A better explanation. A tighter claim. That’s it.
This is a conversation. A back-and-forth. And you get a chance to respond. To revise. To reframe. And if you do it well, you get your patent.
You’ll receive something called an “Office Action”
That’s the official document. The Office Action lays out exactly why your application was rejected.
It’ll reference the parts of patent law—101, 102, or 103—and explain how your application doesn’t meet the rules.
Sometimes it’s a quick, straightforward fix. Sometimes it’s more involved. Either way, your next step is to respond. And you usually have a few months to do it.
Here’s where it gets real: your response is everything.
If your reply is vague, slow, or poorly written, you lose momentum. But if it’s thoughtful, strategic, and clear, you’re back on track.
How to respond like a pro
This isn’t a time to guess. You need a plan. A response to an Office Action should do three things:
- Understand what the examiner is really saying
- Show where you agree—and where you don’t
- Adjust your claims, if needed, in a way that keeps your invention protected
This isn’t just about arguing. It’s about positioning. You want to show the examiner that you understand the law, you understand your invention, and you’ve thought it through.
You also want to make sure you don’t give away too much. Because once you change your claims, that becomes part of the record. So every word matters.
At PowerPatent, we handle this by pairing our software with real patent attorneys. The software does the heavy lifting—mapping claims, pulling references, organizing facts.
The attorneys handle the nuance—writing smart, sharp, human responses that make your invention shine.
It’s fast, strategic, and tailored to what startup founders actually need: progress without pain.
👉 Want to see how we help with Office Actions? Learn more: https://powerpatent.com/how-it-works
What if you get rejected again?
It happens. You respond. The examiner pushes back again. That’s called a “final rejection”—but here’s the trick: it’s not really final.
You still have options. You can:
- File a continuation and keep arguing
- Appeal the decision
- Adjust your claims and try again
What matters is that you don’t walk away too early. Many of the best patents took a few rounds. The key is knowing how to navigate each round with strategy, not emotion.
This is where experience helps. A lot. Because knowing when to push, when to narrow, when to pivot—that’s what keeps you moving forward.
Wrapping It Up
If you’re building something new and trying to patent it, rejections can feel like roadblocks. But they’re not. They’re just signals. They’re the system’s way of saying, “This needs more work.” That’s all.
A 101 rejection means the idea feels too abstract. You need to show it’s a real, technical solution.
A 102 rejection means someone else already did it. You need to show how your invention is different.
A 103 rejection means your idea feels like a predictable combo. You need to show what makes it unexpected or smart.
Leave a Reply