决定要点：如果一项权利要求与作为最接近的现有技术的对比文件相比存在多个

Decision points: If a claim has multiple distinguishing technical features compared with the reference document that is the closest prior art, but some of the distinguishing technical features have been disclosed in another reference document and are used in that reference document. The functions achieved are the same as those in the present claim, and the other distinguishing technical features are common knowledge in the field. Based on the reference document of the closest prior art, another reference document and the reference document in the field are combined. If the technical solution claimed in the claim is obvious to common knowledge, then the claim does not contain inventive step.

Decision point: If a claim has multiple distinctive technical features compared to the comparison document as the closest existing technology, but some of the distinctive technical features have been disclosed in another comparison document, and their role in the comparison document is the same as that in this claim, and the other distinctive technical features are common knowledge in the art, If it is evident that the technical solution claimed in the claim is obtained by combining another comparative document and common knowledge in the art on the basis of the closest existing technical comparison document, then the claim does not possess creativity.

Decision points: If a claim has many different technical features compared with the comparison document as the closest prior art, but some of the different technical features have been disclosed in another comparison document, and their roles in the comparison document are the same as those in the claim, while the other part of the different technical features are common knowledge in the field, it is obvious to obtain the technical scheme required by the claim on the basis of the comparison document as the closest prior art and the other comparison document and the common knowledge in the field.