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
As we predicted in our 2023 report, 2024 was a banner year for design rights in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) agreed to consider en banc whether the long-standing designpatent obviousness test required modification. and elsewhere. In last years report, we noted that the U.S. While the new.
Inter partes activity involving designpatents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was relatively low in 2024. The PTAB rendered just two inter partes decisions involving designpatents: Next Step Group, Inc. IPR 2023-00658, Paper 16 (PTAB Aug. Deckers Outdoor Corp., EP Family Corp., 16, 2024).
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced that a final rule will be published tomorrow, November 16, in the Federal Register implementing a designpatent practitioner bar. A request for comments (RFC) was also published in October 22.
by Dennis Crouch The USPTO is officially establishing a separate designpatent practitioner bar with its final rule published on November 16, 2023 and effective January 2, 2024. Currently, a single patent bar governs registration for anyone seeking to practice before the USPTO in utility, plant, and designpatent matters.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has granted a rare en banc review of its January, 2023, decision in LKQ Corporation v. Patent D855,508 covers a “vehicle front skid bar.”
Designpatents and utility patents are two different things. Designpatents 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.,
Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have significant impact on designpatent jurisprudence. However, nowhere more than the U.S. In particular, the U.S.
Oral arguments were held on Thursday, January 12, 2023, in Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. The parties faced off in a rematch at the Federal Circuit following an earlier bout involving the same designpatent, U.S. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to the Federal Register that proposes a separate designpatent practitioner bar. Designpatent practitioners would only be able to participate in designpatent proceedings.
2023 was another busy year for district court decisions! There were patent- and case-dispositive designpatent decisions across a range of venues and at a range of case postures, including claim construction rulings, summary judgment decisions, and even multiple jury trials.
Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have significant impact on designpatent jurisprudence. However, nowhere more than the U.S. By: Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
Two of the three final written decisions rendered in 2023 are notable because they are the first ones to cancel a designpatent for a graphical user interface design. D930,702 for an animated graphical user interface, finding the patenteddesign anticipated and.
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) published its final rule, creating a separate designpatent bar where admitted designpatent practitioners will practice in designpatent proceedings only. (88 16, 2023).). 78644 (Nov. By: McDermott Will & Emery
by Dennis Crouch The United States Patent and Trademark Office has proposed a rule to create a separate designpatent practitioner bar. The USPTO is publishing this proposal in the Federal Register on May 16, 2023 (link below to the prepub). The proposal appears to not affect those already registered to practice.
However, owners may not appreciate another type of intellectual property right that can complement their trademark portfolios: designpatents. Below is an overview of the potential benefits of filing designpatent applications to protect two types of designs: trade dress and graphical.
by Dennis Crouch Designpatents 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. at 415, should cause us to eliminate or modify: (a) Durling’s requirement that “[b]efore one can begin to combine prior art designs.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) recently reached an important milestone. On September 26, 2023, the USPTO issued its millionth designpatent. . By: Quarles & Brady LLP
The trend of the US International Trade Commission issuing remedial orders for designpatents at higher percentages than for utility patents continued in 2023.1 From 2015-2023, 356 such investigations were concluded. And of those 356 investigations, 187 cases proceeded to Final Determination.
This post will focus on another key issue from the case – the relevance of logos in designpatent 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.
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) published a notice regarding supplemental guidance for PTO personnel examining designpatent claims containing computer-generated images. 80277 (Nov. By: McDermott Will & Emery
Gajewski, and Ivy Clarice Estoesta will present the webinar "2023DesignPatents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends" on Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. EST. Attendees will receive an advance copy of our DesignPatents Year in Review report via email after the webinar concludes. Durkin, Deirdre M.
The outlines of global design protection change regularly, with every year bringing significant updates in at least some major jurisdictions. 2023 saw the near-completion of global adoption of partial design practice (China and Brazil are now there, Australia nearly so).
22, 2023) - The Kohler Co. is pursuing designpatent infringement claims for one of its many fixtures. The Wisconsin-based company says an importer is profiting from Kohler’s designs and has filed a patent infringement lawsuit to stop Sweethome from selling certain faucets. Kohler Co. Sweethome d/b/a Sweethome247.com,
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) clarified the law on comparison prior art in designpatent cases. 15, 2023), the Federal Circuit provided guidance on the types of prior art that can be reviewed by courts and juries in the comparative prior art stage of the infringement analysis of.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in a rare en banc review of the court’s January, 2023, decision in LKQ Corporation v. That decision affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling that LKQ failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that GM’s designpatent was anticipated or would have been obvious.
In 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued three opinions regarding U.S. designpatents. The three 2023 opinions are Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, and Blue Gentian, LLC v. Tristar Products, Inc.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued its one millionth designpatent on September 26, 2023. D1,000,000 claims the ornamental design for a dispensing comb. This milestone comes during a particularly prolific period for designpatents.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) recently reached an important milestone. On September 26, 2023, the USPTO issued its millionth designpatent. United States Patent D1,000,000 covers the ornamental design for a dispensing comb, as shown below. § 171).
15, 2023) , the Federal Circuit vacated a jury verdict of non-infringement in a design-patent infringement action filed by Columbia Sportswear against Seirus Innovative Accessories. DesignPatent No. gloves) have a wavy pattern with the “Seirus” logo throughout the design. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc.
Thank you for reading the September 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. In this issue: - FTC Guidelines Influence How Influencers Influence - How DesignPatents Can Complement Brands' Trademark Portfolios. By: Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
Addressing a matter of first impression concerning the scope of prior art relevant to a designpatent infringement analysis, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that “to qualify as comparison prior art, the prior-art design must be applied to the article of manufacture identified in the claim.”
by Dennis Crouch Seirus has petitioned for writ of certiorari in its long-running designpatent dispute with Columbia Sportswear. Federal Circuit’s 2023 Decision. Columbia’s designpatent claims an “ornamental design of a heat reflective material” as shown in the figures. 3d 665 (Fed.
Patent and Trademark Office published new guidance in the Federal Register on November 17, 2023, that clarifies the requirements for designpatents of computer-generated images, icons, and graphical user interfaces.
GM is perhaps as dramatic a change for the designpatent arena as Alice was for utility patents. The old Rosen-Durling test made it almost impossible to reject a designpatent as obvious except for extreme cases involving either direct copying or extremely broad claims.
2023) ( docket ). As Professor Crouch has noted , the Federal Circuit has granted rehearing en banc in the designpatent case of LKQ v. In support of LKQ’s petition for rehearing, some of my friends and colleagues submitted an amicus brief wherein they argued against what they called “designpatent doctrinal exceptionalism.”
Addressing the standard for obviousness of designpatents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a per curiam opinion, upheld the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that a challenged designpatent was not obvious over the pre-KSR designpatent obviousness test or anticipated.
Designpatents and utility patents are two different things. Designpatents 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.,
The USPTO is seeking comment on two proposals that would expand the scope of who may become a “patent attorney” Expanding admission criteria for registration to practice in patent cases before the USPTO. Expanding opportunities to appear before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
Designpatent holders can rejoice, for now, as the Federal Circuit reinforces its stance on the invalidity of designpatents based on obviousness. On January 20, 2023, the Federal Circuit upheld a decades old rule that governs designpatents in LKQ Corp., Keystone Auto. GM Global Tech. Operations LLC.
Late last week, more than half a dozen amicus briefs were filed in support of GM Global Technology Operations in a case that is set to potentially shake up designpatent law. In June of this year, the CAFC granted a rare en banc review of its January, 2023, decision in LKQ Corporation v.
Teleflex on designpatents. June 30, 2023) (per curiam). The Federal Circuit withdrew its earlier panel decision addressing KSR’s application to designpatents. LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations, Case No. 21-2348 (Fed. By: McDermott Will & Emery
1] LKQ, an auto parts repair vendor for GM, successfully petitioned for inter partes review of GM’s designpatent 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. Operations LLC. [1]
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) clarified the law on comparison prior art in designpatent cases. DesignPatent No. D657,093 (“the D’093 Patent”) via sales of its products containing HeatWave™ liner material, as illustrated side-by-side below.
Oral arguments were held on Thursday, January 12, 2023, in Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. The parties faced off in a rematch at the Federal Circuit following an earlier bout involving the same designpatent, U.S. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. and Curver Luxembourg, SARL, v.
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