On Tuesday, November 28, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding the Federal Circuit’s "teaching-suggestion-motivation" (TSM) test for obviousness. Several justices voiced concern over the Federal Circuit's obviousness test; Justice Scalia calling it "legal gobbledygook," Justice Roberts terming it "jargon" and Justice Breyer wondering what "motivation" meant in terms of the applicable statute. KSR International v. Teleflex, Case No. 04-1350 (Supr. Ct., Nov. 28, 2006).
The patent at issue relates to an adjustable gas (throttle) pedal assembly in combination with an electronic control. Neither is individually novel. Instead of mounting certain electronic sensors for engine control on the gas pedal, the invention in issue locates the sensors adjacent to the pedal but mounted on the vehicle body. The issue was whether a claim to such an invention would have been obvious to one of skill in the art under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
