This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In our new paper, The Truth About DesignPatents , we debunk three widely held—but incorrect—views about U.S. designpatents. Taken together, these myths paint a grim picture of designpatents: Half of all designpatent applications are rejected. Acquiring DesignPatents.
What is the designpatentinfringement test? The test for designpatentinfringement involves a visual comparison between the patenteddesign and the accused product. The issue is whether the accused product would deceive an ordinary observer to suppose it to be the patenteddesign.
These appear to be the first—and certainly the first precedential—Federal Circuit cases dealing with the merits of one of the numerous “Schedule A” designpatent cases that have been filed in recent years in the NDIL. It is clear, from reading the decision, that the designpatentinfringement claims lacked merit.
Designpatents offer valuable protection in a patent portfolio, including conferring different strategic advantages compared to those of utility patents. For example, designpatents allow for recovery of “total profits” — not just lost profits or reasonable royalties as provided for infringed utility patents. [1]
Johnson claims it owns multiple utility and designpatents including those at issue in this case, U.S. Patent Nos. 11,022,332 , 10,684,029 , 10,528,013 , 8,826,165 , 8,190,728 , D788,785 , D924,888 , D924,890 (collectively, “Asserted Patents”). The case was assigned to Judge Damon R.
The parties faced off in a rematch at the Federal Circuit following an earlier bout involving the same designpatent, U.S. In this instance, Columbia appealed to the Federal Circuit after the jury returned a verdict of non-infringement in the lower court. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. and Curver Luxembourg, SARL, v.
Other Posts COVID-19 Vaccine PatentInfringement? The Battle Between Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech Continues The litigation surrounding mRNA patent thickens in the USA as Pfizer/ BioNTech files defence and counterclaims against the patentinfringement allegations made by Moderna. Banijay Asia and Anr.
In recent years, there have been a number of high-profile litigations in the United States involving patents directed to each of the above-referenced components, including patent litigations related to cathodes, 13 anodes, 14 separators, 15 electrolytes, 16 battery cell packaging, 17 and battery module packaging.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content