Which statute emphasizes the relationship between prior art and the claimed invention's obviousness?

The statute that emphasizes the relationship between prior art and the claimed invention's obviousness is 35 U.S.C. 103. This section specifically addresses the standard for determining whether a claimed invention is patentable based on its non-obviousness in view of prior art.

Obviousness is assessed by considering the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art and determining whether those differences would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. This analysis is crucial because even if an invention is novel (new), it can still be unpatentable if it is deemed obvious in light of existing inventions or knowledge.

On the other hand, 35 U.S.C. 101 defines patentable subject matter, focusing on what types of inventions can be patented without delving into issues of novelty or obviousness. 35 U.S.C. 102 addresses novelty and the conditions under which a claimed invention may be considered new, while 35 U.S.C. 112 relates to the specification and claims of a patent, ensuring they are clear and enable a person skilled in the art to practice the invention. Each of these other statutes addresses different aspects of patent law, but it is 35 U.S