solution

KSR designs and manufactures auto parts and sells them to auto manufacturers (not consumers). KSR developed a pedal device for Ford vehicles and also received a patent on the pedal device. KSR also sold products to General Motors (GM), and, in order to make the pedal device compatible for GM cars, KSR added an electronic throttle control to the pedal device. Teleflex claimed to have a patent for the pedal device that could be connected to such a throttle and, therefore, sued KSR for patent infringement. KSR defended on the basis that the device produced for GM was simply a combination of two existing products and was not patentable

1 What do you think Teleflex’s specific theory of infringement was? 2. Which element of patentability does KSR claim Teleflex is missing in the combined device?