On April 30, 2007 the United States Supreme Court handed down an important decision on the scope of obviousness under 35 USC § 103.
Although the case concerned the placement of an electronic control, (i.e., a throttle control) on a vehicle control pedal, language in the decision could affect on the scope afforded claims drawn to computer implemented inventions, such as automated systems and business method patents.
Applying a “teaching, suggestion, motivation test” the Federal Circuit had reversed a District Court’s finding that a claimed vehicle control pedal was obvious.
Read the complete article by clicking on the link below.
Reprinted with permission from Portfolio Media, Inc.
Author(s)
Related Insights
December 12, 2025
Health Care Law Today
Eleventh Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Landmark Constitutional Challenge to False Claims Act’s Qui Tam Provisions
On December 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical…
December 11, 2025
Foley Viewpoints
Antitrust Risks and Compliance Strategies in Intellectual Property Portfolio Management
This article analyzes how intellectual property portfolio management can simultaneously promote innovation and present potential…
December 11, 2025
Foley Viewpoints
CARB Releases Proposed Regulations for SB 261 and 253
On December 9, 2025, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) released its proposed regulatory text for the initial regulations…