Which of the following is one of the KSR rationales for obviousness?

The rationale that embodies one of the KSR factors for obviousness is centered on the concept of combining known elements in predictable ways. This approach stems from the Supreme Court's decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., which shifted the focus of obviousness assessments to a more flexible standard. The ruling emphasized that if a patent claim involves a combination of prior art elements, and those elements could be combined using known methods to achieve predictable results, the claim may be deemed obvious.

This understanding underlines that the mere combination of existing components does not automatically result in a nonobvious invention; instead, it specifically considers whether those known elements were combined in a way that would have been obvious to someone skilled in the art at the time of the invention. Therefore, the choice related to the combination of elements by known methods accurately captures a key rationale derived from the KSR decision. This principle helps to evaluate whether an invention simplifies or enhances functionality in an expected manner, thus contributing to the overall assessment of its obviousness.