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
April 3, 2026
Energy Current
Texas Legislature Sets Its Sights on Data Centers and AI: What You Need to Know
Texas House and Senate leadership recently released their interim charges, which serve as "homework assignments" for legislative…
April 3, 2026
Foley Viewpoints
For Your Eyes Only? Not Quite: Shadow AI in the Workplace
While many companies are still developing governance frameworks for authorized AI tools, an emerging risk has quietly surfaced: employees using unauthorized transcription tools without the company’s or participants’ consent.
April 3, 2026
Manufacturing Industry Advisor
Connecticut Appellate Court Narrows Scope of Petroleum “Franchise” Protections for Gas Station Operators
The Appellate Court of Connecticut affirmed a trial court’s judgment in favor of a petroleum distributor/lessor, holding that convenience…