This case concerned the condition of non-obviousness as a prerequisite for patentability. The Supreme Court of the United States (hereinafter: the Court) reinforced the objective analysis approach for applying 35 U.S.C. §103 (i.e. the domestic provision on non-obviousness) as it was established with the three determining factors in Graham v. John Deere. It found that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (hereinafter: the Federal Circuit) had erred in rigidly applying the narrow teaching, suggestion and motivation test (1) for obviousness under § 103, (2) for the narrow understanding of the use of hindsight and (3) for not considering whether the invention was obvious to try. They found the above to be in conflict with the broader understanding of obviousness established in Graham.