Remove 2008 Remove Design Patent Remove Designs
article thumbnail

Defending Design Patents

Patently-O

In our new paper, The Truth About Design Patents , we debunk three widely held—but incorrect—views about U.S. design patents. Taken together, these myths paint a grim picture of design patents: Half of all design patent applications are rejected. Acquiring Design Patents.

article thumbnail

The Scope of Comparison Prior Art in Design Patent Infringement

Patently-O

2022) raises a number of important design patent law questions, including an issue of first-impression of the scope of “comparison prior art” available for the ordinary observer infringement analysis under Egyptian Goddess, Inc. 2008) (en banc) and its key predecessor Smith v. 2008) (en banc). 2021-2299 (Fed.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Logos Remain Relevant: Source Confusion and Design Patent Infringement

Patently-O

This post will focus on another key issue from the case – the relevance of logos in design patent infringement analysis. Still, ornamental logos found on the accused product can still be relevant as visual distractors in the process of evaluating similarities and differences between the claimed design and accused design.

article thumbnail

Seeking Clarity on Comparison Prior Art: Seirus Petitions Supreme Court in Heat Wave Design Patent Dispute

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch Seirus has petitioned for writ of certiorari in its long-running design patent dispute with Columbia Sportswear. Columbia’s design patent claims an “ornamental design of a heat reflective material” as shown in the figures. Patent D657,093. 2008) (en banc) and Gorham Co.

article thumbnail

Design Patent Obviousness Inquiry Is Up for Review at the CAFC

LexBlog IP

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. Under the current Standard, the range of applicable prior art combinations in design cases is limited.

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Requires Prior Art Be Analogous for Anticipation of Design Patents

LexBlog IP

Design patents offer valuable protection in a patent portfolio, including conferring different strategic advantages compared to those of utility patents. 1] Likewise, design patents are not subject to attacks under 35 U.S.C. § ” [6].

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Requires Prior Art Be Analogous for Anticipation of Design Patents

IP Intelligence

Design patents offer valuable protection in a patent portfolio, including conferring different strategic advantages compared to those of utility patents. For example, design patents allow for recovery of “total profits” — not just lost profits or reasonable royalties as provided for infringed utility patents. [1]