Michael Pohl (US)

Subscribe to all posts by Michael Pohl (US)

A “known technique” only needs to be a suitable replacement to support a conclusion of obviousness

A claim that recites a combination of prior art elements may be obvious when the combination merely involves the use of a “known technique” that “has been used to improve one device” to “improve similar devices in the same way.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007).  In Intel Corp. v. … Continue reading