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.
Companies associated with William Grecia have filed over a dozen cases alleging infringement of designpatents for “animated graphical user interfaces.” The patent asserted in that case, U.S. D930,702 , was issued in 2021 and claims a “design for a display screen portion with animated graphical user interface.”
Until now, case law has defined an “article of manufacture” solely for purposes of damages in designpatentinfringement actions. The federal court’s decision to reject this position has now harmonized the definition of an article of manufacture across multiple statutes.
Earlier this month, ten of the world’s largest companies were accused of infringingdesignpatents claiming animated graphical user interfaces (GUIs). These assertions were made in addition to at least ten other lawsuits filed since September 2021 asserting animated GUI designpatents. By: Quarles & Brady LLP
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.,
This post will focus on another key issue from the case – the relevance of logos in designpatentinfringement 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.
2022) raises a number of important designpatent 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. An accused design does not have to exactly match the drawings. by Dennis Crouch.
A district court recently refused to exclude testimony regarding consumer surveys conducted by a designpatent expert, holding instead that the consumer surveys may be probative of how an ordinary observer would view the designs at issue, and thus could assist the factfinder in determining designpatentinfringement under the ordinary observer test.
How can an Amazon seller benefit from designpatents? Those who tend to ignore IP are the ones caught off guard when, for example, a patent owner blocks them from selling a competing product on Amazon. If you are an Amazon seller, designpatents must be considered – either offensively or defensively.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals recently narrowed the scope of “comparison prior art” that may be used in a designpatentinfringement analysis. Comparison prior art” includes references used to help highlight distinctions between a plaintiff’s claimed design and a defendant’s design that is accused of infringing.
is pursuing designpatentinfringement claims for one of its many fixtures. The Wisconsin-based company says an importer is profiting from Kohler’s designs and has filed a patentinfringement lawsuit to stop Sweethome from selling certain faucets. Sweethome d/b/a Sweethome247.com, com, Case No.
The Federal Circuit has ruled that “comparison prior art” used in infringement analysis in a designpatentinfringement must be applied to the same “article of manufacture” that is identified in the claim of the designpatent. By: AEON Law
In a much-anticipated opinion that addresses an issue of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit narrowed the scope of “comparison prior art”―prior art considered by the fact finder during an infringement analysis―to the same article of manufacture claimed by the patenteddesign. By: Morgan Lewis
In late November 2021, Lululemon launched a lawsuit for designpatentinfringement against Peloton in relation to perceived similarities in the design elements of various pieces of activewear, including sports bras and leggings.
and its affiliated parties (“Woodland”), asserting designpatentinfringement, false advertising, trade secret. 26, 2024) - On August 26, 2024, the Western District of Wisconsin issued a decision adjudicating a number of motions in a case involving a thicket of intellectual property claims and counterclaims. By: Irwin IP LLP
What is the designpatentinfringement test? The test for designpatentinfringement involves a visual comparison between the patenteddesign and the accused product. What seems so hard about looking at two designs and determining whether appear substantially similar to an ordinary observer?
15, 2023) , the Federal Circuit vacated a jury verdict of non-infringement in a design-patentinfringement action filed by Columbia Sportswear against Seirus Innovative Accessories. DesignPatent No. gloves) have a wavy pattern with the “Seirus” logo throughout the design. These products (e.g.,
So, how do you use your patent effectively to block an infringing Amazon ASIN? Design or Utility Patent: What type of IP will block Amazon sellers more effectively? Know which type of patent you own. Amazon offers different options for resolving infringement depending upon the type of patent involved.
manufacturer of the Hydrow Rower, brought a designpatentinfringement and trade dress infringement action against iFit Health & Fitness (formerly Icon Health & Fitness) in the District of Delaware. On February 14, 2022, Hydrow, Inc., By: Harness IP
We are pleased that Seirus prevailed against Columbia’s claims of patentinfringement,” 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.
collectively, “LKQ”) in several designpatentinfringement matters, including this case against GM Global Technology Operations and by extension General Motors Co. collectively, “GM”). By: Irwin IP LLP
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.
by Dennis Crouch Seirus has petitioned for writ of certiorari in its long-running designpatent dispute with Columbia Sportswear. Columbia’s designpatent claims an “ornamental design of a heat reflective material” as shown in the figures. Patent D657,093. Swisa, Inc. , 3d 665 (Fed.
Addressing a matter of first impression concerning the scope of prior art relevant to a designpatentinfringement 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.”
Can filing a designpatent protect you from infringement? Patent professionals, including myself, constantly stress that a patent does not protect its owner from infringement. Anyone who has read my posts on the differences between patentability and infringement will understand this long-standing principle.
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. The design must be a design for a specific article; it cannot exist independently of the article.
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. The design must be a design for a specific article; it cannot exist independently of the article.
Earlier this month, ten of the world’s largest companies were accused of infringingdesignpatents claiming animated graphical user interfaces (GUIs). These assertions were made in addition to at least ten other lawsuits filed since September 2021 asserting animated GUI designpatents.
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.
Can you include a logo in your designpatent application? Let me share a strategy if you’re thinking about filing a designpatent application for a new product that might be considered somewhat similar to existing products. It is possible to include a logo in your designpatent application for a product.
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.,
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) clarified the law on comparison prior art in designpatent cases. In the initial case, Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. (“Columbia”) sued Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. (“Seirus”) for infringing U.S. DesignPatent No.
Get a DesignPatent Instead The path to registering a trademark can be strewn with landmines. When your trademark application faces difficult rejections, would a designpatent make more sense? Before making that decision, keep in mind the 1-year grace period for filing US patents. Rejected Trademark Application?
Does your product infringe a patent? Patentinfringement can be tricky, but not incomprehensible. No single article can tell you everything you need to know about infringingpatents, but I hope you will gain some wisdom from reading this post. Are you looking at a designpatent or utility patent?
This Patent Law case involves a patentinfringement lawsuit brought by Fa-Hsing Lu against Hyper Bicycles, Inc. regarding two designpatents Lu holds for the ornamental design of a bicycle. By: Whitcomb Selinsky, PC
For nearly 30 years, the inclusion of a trademark in the design of a defendant's product did not mean much in the designpatentinfringement analysis. That changed on August 6, 2021, in Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., By: Jones Day
The parties faced off in a rematch at the Federal Circuit following an earlier bout involving the same designpatent, U.S. The Quarles & Brady design rights legal team is nationally-recognized for its extensive knowledge and practice experience in this complex and important field. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc.
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]
The FAC alleged, inter alia, patentinfringement of both utility and designpatents by promotional vehicles supplied by Aardvark Event Logistics, Inc. On March 23, 2023, Magistrate Judge Wang (S.D.N.Y.) recommended granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ T-Mobile, USA, Inc. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.’s
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.
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