KSR International Co., v. Teleflex Inc. - U.S. Supreme Court, April 2007
Mondaq Business Briefing › United States Law Articles in English (2008)
Linked as:
Extract
KSR International Co., v. Teleflex Inc. - U.S. Supreme Court, April 2007
INTRODUCTION
In KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007), the Supreme Court held that the test for obviousness used by the Federal Circuit was inconsistent with the patent Statute and Supreme Court precedent. Specifically, the Supreme Court rejected, in part, the Federal Circuit's "TSM test," which requires a specific finding of some motivation, teaching or suggestion to combine prior art teachings, in the particular manner claimed, before a claim may be found invalid. In general, the Supreme Court's decision will make patent claims easier to invalidate and more difficult to obtain and defend. The impact of this decision may be greater for electrical/mechanical cases as opposed to chemical inventions. BACKGROUND OF OBVIOUSNESS LAW A. Novelty And Unobviousness Under the patent laws, a valid claim must be both novel and non-obvious. A claim lacks novelty, and is therefore invalid, if each of the claim limitations is identically disclosed in a single prior art reference. A claim is obvious and ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
