A Patented Court Term: KSR, Microsoft & MedImmune’s Impact On IP And Innovation

Issues:

Economic and Individual Liberties: Intellectual / Private Property Rights

Download the PDF

By Robert P. Parker, a partner with the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP.

Related Content

Legal Backgrounders
June 8, 2007

KSR v. Teleflex: High Court’s “Obviousness” Ruling No Sea Change in Patent Law

By The Honorable Gerald J. Mossinghoff, Senior Counsel at the Alexandria, Virginia law firm Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, P.C.

Subscribe

2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20036

© 2026 WLF. All rights reserved.

This site uses cookies for performance, site traffic analysis, and social media purposes. Find out more about our cookie policy here. You can adjust your preferences in cookie settings.

Leading Legal Scholar John Yoo of UC Berkeley Law Joins WLF’s Legal Policy Advisory Board

Montgomery v. Caribe

A Forceful Railroad Regulation Policy Statement on Preemption Serves the Public Interest

Legal Backgrounders

A Patented Court Term: KSR, Microsoft & MedImmune’s Impact On IP And Innovation

KSR v. Teleflex: High Court’s “Obviousness” Ruling No Sea Change in Patent Law

Featured

Leading Legal Scholar John Yoo of UC Berkeley Law Joins WLF’s Legal Policy Advisory Board

Featured Case

Montgomery v. Caribe

Featured

A Forceful Railroad Regulation Policy Statement on Preemption Serves the Public Interest

Legal Backgrounders

A Patented Court Term: KSR, Microsoft & MedImmune’s Impact On IP And Innovation

Related Content

KSR v. Teleflex: High Court’s “Obviousness” Ruling No Sea Change in Patent Law