The Federal Circuit's TSM (teaching, suggestion, or motivation) requirement for showing non-obviousness was overruled by the Supreme Court in its 2007 KSR v. Teleflex opinion, available at http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5415246430487863...
KSR stressed the need for common sense in obviousness analysis; it also mentioned that "obvious to try" can be considered.
Yes, i'm quite aware (which is why i said "used to be"), I was simply explaining the quote in the MPEP that was cited by the parent, which was part of a discussion of what the law of obviousness used to be.
KSR stressed the need for common sense in obviousness analysis; it also mentioned that "obvious to try" can be considered.
An excellent summary of the case by a young and well-regarded patent law professor is at http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2007/04/ksr_v_teleflex_.html.