Law360, New York (September 8, 2015, 5:43 PM EDT) -- It has now been more than eight years since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., rejecting what it characterized as the Federal Circuit's "rigid approach" to obviousness challenges to patents claiming combinations of known elements.[1] As part of the decision, KSR rejected the Federal Circuit's limitation of the "problem" that could give rise to motivation to combine references in an obviousness analysis to the "problem" the inventor was trying to solve.[2] Instead KSR held that "any need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of invention" can provide a motivation for the claimed combination.[3] This article identifies the KSR guideposts for defining and using the problem that can motivate the combination of references in an obviousness analysis and discusses the Federal Circuit's application of those guideposts....