TFA is wrong, you can see it pretty clearly by reading the 2010 KSR guidlines.
First off, they are administrative rules, and have no force of law and are not enforceable in any way.
Second, they mearly state that the KSR SCOTUS ruling does not replace the old methods of determining obviousness, it simply gives the PTO new lines of reasoning to use when rejecting a patent.
Third, it reminds patent officers that rejections must be based on the law, and that for whatever line of reasoning they follow (specifically talking about the seven rules in the 2007 guidelines here), "appropriate factual findings are required in order to apply the enumerated rationales properly."
I don't know where swpat.org got the idea that this eliminated any of the 2007 rationals, but it isn't in there at all. If anything this makes it easier for patent officers to reject a patent for obvious, because it makes it clear that the new standards (2007 guidelines) don't replace the old standards, they apply in addition to the old obviousness standards (pre-2007 guidelines).
Really, if they bothered to read it the wouldn't be making asses of themselves.
Please mod parent up. (I don't have mod points or I'd do it myself.)