The standard for novelty in patents requires that the invention not be obvious to a person skilled in the relevant field. The patent filing itself is required t

The standard for novelty in patents requires that the invention not be obvious to a person skilled in the relevant field. The patent filing itself is required to describe the invention in enough detail that it can be understood by a person with ordinary skill in the field. What is the logic, then, behind having random laymen as jurors in patent cases? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a jury of people skilled in the relevant field?