JD Supra Law

JULY 10, 2023

Last week, the Federal Circuit decided to consider, en banc, whether the Supreme Court’s 2007 KSR decision regarding obviousness overruled the Federal Circuit’s decades-old Rosen and Durling tests for design patents, setting in motion a potential lowering of the bar for obviousness.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

JD Supra Law

JANUARY 13, 2023

Big changes to design patent invalidity law may be coming. 398, 419 (2007). A pending IPR appeal challenges the Federal Circuit’s 40-year-old obviousness formula as inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s rejection of “a rigid rule that limits the obviousness inquiry” in KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S.

Design Patent 55

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 55

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 2, 2023

Design patents and utility patents are two different things. Design patents protect ornamental designs, such as the shape of a perfume bottle or the design on flatware. To be patentable, however, both designs and functional inventions must satisfy two requirements. Telflex, Inc.,

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 24, 2023

1] LKQ, an auto parts repair vendor for GM, successfully petitioned for inter partes review of GM’s design patent for a front fender design, [2] arguing it was anticipated by a prior art reference (Lain) and obvious over Lian alone or in combination with a brochure for the 2010 Hyundai Tucson. 1727 (2007).

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

43(B)log

OCTOBER 1, 2022

Design patents play a role when we have them, typically a handbag/jewelry/diamond cuts/chain designs/shoes. Issue: legal is often the last to know of new designs, so you need to know before the design is launched: need to explain that legal needs to be part of the process. Apple v Samsung changed perceptions.

Intellectual Property 83

Intellectual Property Design Patent Law Designs 83

IP Law 360

AUGUST 9, 2022

A wireless technology expert testifying for Apple told a California jury Tuesday that the company's 2007 iPhone Bluetooth headset and some patents filed years ago served as a precursor to its modern-day AirPods, thus rendering "everything" in Pinn Inc.'s s wireless earbud design patents "obvious."

Design Patent 40

Design Patent Patent IP Designs 40

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

AUGUST 13, 2021

Cross, the Plaintiff is the owner of three design patents for convertible t-shirt designs, U.S. Patent Nos. D/580,633, D/581,136 , and D/341,471 (collectively, the “Patents in Suit”). Practice Tip: The current design patent term, if filed on or after May 13, 2015 is 15 years from the date of grant.

Patent Infringement 52

Patent Infringement Design Patent Patent Designs 52

Patently-O

JUNE 30, 2023

by Dennis Crouch Design patents continue to rise in importance, but the underlying law full of eccentricities. The crux of the issue lies in the manner patent law decisions are typically written. 398 (2007), overrule or abrogate In re Rosen, 673 F.2d The case under scrutiny is LKQ Corp. GM Global Tech , 21-2348 (Fed.

Design Patent 62

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 62

The TTABlog

MARCH 2, 2022

It has used TINKER BELL as a trademark for dolls since 2007 and registered the mark in 2009 without a Section 2(f) acquired distinctiveness claim. The dolls themselves are protectable by copyright and/or design patent, but their names should be free to use as long as the source is distinguished. Text Copyright John L.

Public Domain 72

Public Domain Designs Design Registration 72

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 2, 2024

GM Global Technology to rule on the issue of whether the current test for determining obviousness of design patents, i.e., the Rosen/Durling Standard, is proper in view of the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in KSR v. Teleflex , 550 U.S. Hunter Mfg., 3d 1326, 1334 (Fed. In contrast to the Rosen/Durling Standard, the U.S.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 13, 2023

In a surprising move, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has granted a petition for rehearing en banc on the issue of whether the test for determining obviousness of design patents has been overruled by the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in KSR v. 398 (2007). Teleflex , 550 U.S.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 7, 2023

Last week, the Federal Circuit decided to consider, en banc , whether the Supreme Court’s 2007 KSR decision regarding obviousness overruled the Federal Circuit’s decades-old Rosen and Durling tests for design patents, setting in motion a potential lowering of the bar for obviousness. In re Rosen , 673 F.2d

Design Patent 40

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 40

Intepat

MAY 28, 2024

Patent and Trademark Office recognized that this distinctive glass store design sets Apple stores apart from other retail establishments. To comprehensively protect its store designs, Apple has also secured design patents for the glass panels of the building and the staircase design. In 2007, Apple Inc.

Trademark 52

Trademark Intellectual Property Branding Brands 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

MAY 4, 2022

Fish Principals Craig Deutsch , Jennifer Huang , and Grace Kim , discuss challenging design patents at the PTAB in their Law360 Expert Analysis article. Challenging design patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is difficult — nearly two-thirds of petitions directed to design patents have been denied institution.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 15, 2022

Design Patent No. D450,839 (the D‘839 Patent) for a catheter introducer sheath. Under the on-sale bar, both design and utility patents will be invalid where “the invention was. on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States.”

Patent 52

Patent Invention Designs Design 52

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 3, 2023

When Design Within Reach started, it said in its 2007 10K: “our competitors believe they have exclusive rights” in some of their proudcts, including some of their best selling items, which were reproductions. and design patents were hard to get/not as valuable at the time. In the 1960s, preemption was big (Sears v.

Designs 57

Designs Design Design Patent Branding 57

LexBlog IP

MAY 3, 2022

.” This four-part miniseries of posts provides a birds-eye view of protections available in China for two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) design elements of products or packaging under trademark, copyright, design patent, and anti-unfair competition laws. Design Patent (overall design; partial claiming).

Designs 52

Designs Design Trademark Intellectual Property 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 5, 2022

The next time you would like to protect a great innovative design you expect will be a big hit on the market, you should consider obtaining a design patent. Design patents are great for new designs that are expected to be sold beyond a single year or season. 5] Home Design Servs., ” [8].

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Design Patent Designs Design 52

Patently-O

JUNE 24, 2024

As the Patent Act does for design patent infringement, the Lanham Act allows for disgorgement of profits as a remedy for trademark infringement. ” DG and Dewberry Engineers had previously litigated trademark infringement claims against each other back in the 2006-2007. ” 15 U.S.C.

Trademark 40

Trademark Cease and Desist Litigation Registering Trademarks 40

Above the Fold

JULY 5, 2022

The next time you would like to protect a great innovative design you expect will be a big hit on the market, you should consider obtaining a design patent. Design patents are great for new designs that are expected to be sold beyond a single year or season. 5] Home Design Servs., 1] 17 U.S.C. §

Intellectual Property 40

Intellectual Property Design Patent Designs Design 40

LexBlog IP

APRIL 25, 2023

GM Global Technology Operations LLC [2] , a pair of per curium opinions designated nonprecedential, the Federal Circuit recently rejected arguments that the Supreme Court’s KSR Int’l v. 3] decision overruled the tests for obviousness of design patents established in Durling v. 398 (2007). [4] Telflex, Inc. [3]

Designs 52

Designs Design Design Patent Art 52