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.
Leia o artigo completo clicando no link abaixo.
Reprinted with permission from Portfolio Media, Inc.
Autor(es)
Informações relacionadas
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…
11 de dezembro de 2025
Pontos de vista de Foley
Riscos antitrust e estratégias de conformidade na gestão de portfólios de propriedade intelectual
Este artigo analisa como a gestão do portfólio de propriedade intelectual pode, simultaneamente, promover a inovação e apresentar potencial...
11 de dezembro de 2025
Pontos de vista de Foley
CARB divulga regulamentos propostos para SB 261 e 253
Em 9 de dezembro de 2025, o Conselho de Recursos Atmosféricos da Califórnia (CARB) divulgou o texto regulamentar proposto para as regulamentações iniciais...