Q: My patent was denied because the reviewer claimed that if I combined two existing patents.

A: This is an interesting and complex patent law question. To provide a thorough answer, I'll need to explain a few key concepts in patent law:

1. Novelty: For an invention to be patentable, it must be novel (new). If your invention is identical to a single prior art reference, it lacks novelty.

2. Non-obviousness: Even if an invention is novel, it must also be non-obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time the invention was made.

3. Combination of references: Patent examiners can combine multiple prior art references to reject a patent application for obviousness. This is often referred to as a "103 rejection" in U.S. patent law, referencing 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Now, to address your specific situation:

The examiner's argument that your invention could be created by combining two existing patents is potentially valid from a legal standpoint. This is a common basis for patent rejections. However, the validity of this argument depends on several factors:

1. Whether the combination would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of your invention.

2. Whether there was a motivation to combine these specific patents.

3. Whether the combination would have had a reasonable expectation of success.

4. Whether your invention produces unexpected results or solves long-standing problems in the field.

It's important to note that just because an invention can be created by combining existing patents doesn't automatically mean it's obvious. Your lawyer can potentially argue against this rejection by demonstrating:

1. That there was no motivation to combine these specific patents.

2. That the combination produces unexpected results.

3. That the invention solves a long-standing problem in the field.

4. That the invention has commercial success due to its merits.

While the examiner's argument is valid in principle, it's not necessarily correct in your specific case. The strength of this argument depends on the details of your invention and the cited prior art.

To properly assess and respond to this rejection, you would need to work closely with your patent attorney to analyze the cited patents, the examiner's reasoning, and develop counterarguments based on the specific details of your invention and the prior art.

If you believe the examiner's reasoning is flawed, you can appeal the decision or request an interview with the examiner to further explain your invention and argue against the rejection.