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
The majority of 2024 was a quiet year for designpatent cases at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court issued five opinions involving U.S.
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.
The law surrounding validity, infringement, claim construction, and damages in the designpatent context is notably less developed than in the utility patent context. Nevertheless, courts have fashioned a robust body of case law to guide their decisions in these disputes. On September 7, join. By: Fish & Richardson
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of several designpatents, interest in designpatents grew exponentially.
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of several designpatents, interest in designpatents grew exponentially.
In recent years designpatents have come to have a more vital role in the intellectual property landscape. Designpatents protect the ornamental aspects of Continue reading
Need another reason to secure and enforce designpatents? Designpatents offer a unique additional remedy in district court litigation: profit disgorgement. See 35 U.S.C. By: Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
GM Global Technology Operations, which 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. Patent D855,508 covers a “vehicle front skid bar.”
designpatents are now being taken more seriously. Once an afterthought for IP rights filers, U.S. Several businesses that are based outside of the U.S. increased Continue reading
Need the right patents to stop Amazon sellers from copying your innovative products? Contact US patent attorney Vic Lin at vlin@icaplaw.com to see how we can help protect your Amazon sales. Do you need a utility patent or designpatent? In some cases, it may make sense to file both types of patent applications.
Intel and Xilinx combined to cancel a number of litigation-funded chip patents from Arbor Global Strategies and FG SRC LLC [the latter funded by Freeman Capital Partners]; a number of Fortress-funded subsidiaries were challenged; another 29 IP Edge subsidiary suits; some interesting pharmaceutical action; and companies WebRoot and OpenText, inc.
Earlier in 2022, the USPTO made some minor expansions to the criteria for registering as a patent attorney, but this new proposal offers the possibility of a broader inclusive market and a mechanism for the Office to regularly update eligibility criteria. It also asks whether there should be a separate bar for designpatent practitioners.
We are pleased that Seirus prevailed against Columbia’s claims of patent infringement,” said Christopher Marchese , trial counsel for Seirus and a principal in Fish’s Southern California office. The remaining questions for trial were liability and damages based on the utility patents and damages for the designpatent.
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was attributed to a finding that Samsung infringed three of Apple’s designpatents for the iPhone® smartphone.
A designpatent protects a new, original, ornamental design for an article of manufacture. “Ornamental” means that the design is purely decorative; the patentability is based on its visual aspects. Designpatents protect only the appearance of the article, not any aspect of functionality.
A designpatent protects a new, original, ornamental design for an article of manufacture. Ornamental” means that the design is purely decorative; the patentability is based on its visual aspects. Designpatents protect only the appearance of the article, not any aspect of functionality.
They cover areas including life sciences, litigation, post-grant proceedings, artificial intelligence, designpatents, and trademarks. As we begin a new year, our attorneys look ahead at intellectual property topics they expect will be trending in 2024. By: Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
Applications for designpatents have surged in recent years, with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) reporting a 20% increase in applications over the last five years.
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of several designpatents, interest in designpatents grew exponentially.
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.” 21-2348 (Fed.
Regeneron filed an eighth BPCIA litigation (Case No. 2:24-cv-08760 (D.N.J.)) related to an EYLEA® (aflibercept) biosimilar, against Sandoz’s Enzeevu™ (aflibercept-abzv). By: Venable LLP
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.
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was attributed to a finding that Samsung infringed three of Apple’s designpatents for the iPhone® smartphone.
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. GM Global Technology Operations.
government and GM Global Technology Operations in a case that could change the test for assessing designpatent obviousness. The so-called Rosen-Durling test for designpatent obviousness requires that, first, under In re Rosen (C.C.P.A.,
Gamon Plus and the case of SurgiSil underscore the substantial differences between designpatents and utility patents, but intellectual property litigators can better prepare themselves to dive into this area by keeping in mind a few critical recommendations, says Nathan Sabri at MoFo.
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.
Sources say updates to the Chinese Patent Law regarding designpatents are likely to bring in a wave of new filings, and a surge in litigation along with it
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of several designpatents, interest in designpatents grew exponentially.
In May, the Federal Circuit eliminated the long-standing test for designpatent obviousness. In its place, the Federal Circuit emphasized a flexible approach to the designpatent obviousness analysis, grounded in the Graham factors.1 1 This is a big change in designpatent law.
The Federal Circuit has refused to discard rules that set a high bar for invalidating designpatents, but attorneys say the issue is likely to spur further litigation that could upend the law in addition to creating a new obstacle for designpatents challengers.
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. The latest briefs generally urged the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to keep the law as is in order to avoid major disruptions.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against hoverboard products alleged to infringe four designpatents due to “substantive defects” in the court’s reasoning for granting the injunctions. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated two separate preliminary injunction orders granted by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit yesterday reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB's) finding that Campbell Soup Company, Campbell Sales Company, and Trinity Manufacturing, LLC did not demonstrate the claimed designs of Gamon, Inc.’s s designpatents would have been obvious over the prior art.
District Court for the District of Pennsylvania’s summary judgment that a medical device designpatent was not invalid under the on-sale bar. The district court found the patent was infringed and awarded damages in the amount of $1,247,910. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today reversed the U.S.
What is a patent application attorney (patent prosecutor) versus a patentlitigator? Patent practitioners generally fall under one of two practice areas: 1) patentlitigation, or 2) patent prosecution. Are patentlitigators required to be registered to practice before the USPTO?
Designpatents 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.
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 designpatent infringement claims lacked merit.
A Chicago auto parts company shot back at arguments from major players in the automotive industry over how designpatents should be litigated in the courts, teeing up its argument early next year in front of the full Federal Circuit that "designers do solve problems."
designpatent grants almost tripled. Between 2005 and 2020 the number of U.S. The increased focus on product form (“look”) as a part of function, Continue reading
You cannot simply compare the visual appearance of a product to the patent drawings and conclude that there is infringement because they all look similar. We are not talking about designpatent infringement. No costs or attorney’s fees are recoverable in USPTO patent reexaminations.
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