Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Concept of Obviousness: Scenario post KSR International v Teleflex Inc|
|Keywords:||Non-obviousness;TSM test;Hindsight bias;Common sense;Graham factors;Synergism test|
|Abstract:||‘Non-obviousness’ is a fundamental requirement of patentability under all patent jurisdictions across the globe. The paper maps the evolution of ‘obviousness’ as a concept under the US patent law. It then ventures into implications of the much awaited ruling of the US Supreme Court in KSR International Co v Teleflex Inc which has dynamized the known principles and the validity of pre-existing tests for the determination of ‘non-obviousness’ of patent claims. In US, the law was thought to have settled after Graham v John Deere but the Federal Circuit Court in the 1980s relied upon the TSM test which, although flayed by critics, made the entire process more certain, accurate and practically advantageous. The impetus of the paper is to make a case in favour of the TSM test, which the Court, however did not expressly reject, yet sidelined by showing its reluctance towards its application. The latest ruling of the Court reverts back to the Graham factors and further adds a number of abstract ‘secondary considerations’ like common sense, effects of the market demand, objective reach of the claim etc. which ask for overwide discretion and subjectivity in the process.|
|Appears in Collections:||JIPR Vol.13(1) [January 2008]|
Files in This Item:
|JIPR 13(1) (2008) 7-18.pdf||107.27 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in NOPR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.