Filewrapper®

Category: Design patents


Design Patents and Indefiniteness
August 20, 2018
Post by Luke T. Mohrhauser
Luke T. Mohrhauser             In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit addressed indefiniteness and enablement issues under 35 U.S.C. § 112 as they apply to design patent applications. In In re: Ron Maatita, the court held that two-dimensional drawings in design patents can meet the definiteness and enablement requirements under § 112, and that the .......
Read More


No Sympathy for Samsung
June 04, 2018
Post by Gregory Lars Gunnerson
In May, an eight-member California federal jury awarded Apple a staggering $500+ million verdict as a result of a patent litigation lawsuit that has been ongoing for at least 7 years. The verdict has proved to be particularly puzzling for patent law professors and other patent advocates that disagree over whether an article of manufacture in relation to a patented design can cover a product enc.......
Read More


Surge in Patent Applications Related to 3D Printing: Is Yours One of Them?
July 26, 2017
Post by Jonathan L. Kennedy
The USPTO recently released statistics that over 8,000 patent applications were filed in 2016 related to 3D printing (additive manufacturing). Some of the interesting 3D printing inventions that have been subject to publicity include,prosthetic hands and fingers for children without fingers, three-dimensional bioprinting of human-compatible vascularized tissue developed by graduate students at Harvar.......
Read More


Broad Definition of "Article of Manufacture" Costs Apple $400M
December 06, 2016
Since May 2015, Filewrapper, along with the intellectual property community, has been closely watching the heated Apple v. Samsung design patent and trade dress row.  On December 6th, the Supreme Court upset the controversial $400 million damages award to Apple, essentially holding that such penalties are available for the "article of manufacture,"which may not mean the .......
Read More


Apple v. Samsung-Part II, A Design Patent Breakdown
May 21, 2015
Post by Luke T. Mohrhauser
  The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently decided the appeal for Apple v. Samsung, involving allegations of trade dress dilution, design patent infringement, and utility patent infringement. The case relates to Samsung's alleged copying of Apple's popular iPhone smartphone. A jury previously found that Samsung infringed Apple's design and utility patent.......
Read More


Bring on the New Year - What is in Store for IP in 2014?
December 31, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
Happy New Year to all of our FilewrapperÒ followers! We hope 2013 was a productive year and wish you the best in 2014. As the New Year quickly approaches we would like to share with you a few predictions for 2014 for you to look forward to and for which to prepare! · Increased opportunities for quasi-litigation under AIA. Various new mechanisms are available to challenge patents under the Am.......
Read More


New and Useful - January 31, 2013
January 29, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
· In Soverain Software LLC v. Newegg Inc. the Federal Circuit vacated in part and reversed in part an Eastern District of Texas decision finding Newegg Inc. liable for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,715,314, 5,909,492, and 7,272,639, all relating to electronic commerce. The Federal Circuit offered clarifying insight on the obviousness doctrine. The background facts are as follows: Soverain Soft.......
Read More


More on Crocs at the CAFC
February 28, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
Another decision regarding a number of patents relating to foam based footware, this time held by Crocs, Inc. ("Crocs") has been handed down from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC"). In this appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission ("USITC"), the court addressed obviousness of a utility patent and claim construction of a design patent. This case com.......
Read More


Clogging up the Federal Circuit
February 19, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
On December 17, 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed in International Seaway Trading Corp. v. Walgreens Corp. whether the "ordinary observer" test from Egyptian Goddess likewise applies to anticipation of design patents. In Egyptian Goddess, the CAFC dropped the "point of novelty" test for design patent infringement and adopted the "ordinary observer" test fr.......
Read More


En banc Federal Circuit scraps point of novelty test for design patent infringement
September 22, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In an en banc decision this morning, the Federal Circuit has unanimously held that the "point of novelty" test for design patent infringement should no longer be applied. As stated by the court:[W]e hold that the "point of novelty" test should no longer be used in the analysis of a claim of design patent infringement. Because we reject the "point of novelty" test, we also do not ado.......
Read More


Federal Circuit grants rehearing en banc in design patent case
November 26, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Circuit today granted a petition for rehearing en banc in a design patent case, Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc. In that case, the court held that when a design patent's "point of novelty" is a combination of existing design elements, the point of novelty must be a "non-trivial" advance over the prior art. This essentially incorporated an obviousness-type inquiry into th.......
Read More


"Ordinary observer" can be commercial buyer when buyer uses designed item as part of retail product
September 13, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s order granting summary judgment of non-infringement of two design patents. Specifically, the court acknowledged that the Supreme Court's decision in Gorham Co. v. White held that an "ordinary observer" for purposes of design patent infringement cannot be an expert. Nevertheless, in this case, the "ordinary observer&.......
Read More


When point of novelty is a combination of existing elements, it must be a "non-trivial" advance
August 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a case decided yesterday, the Federal Circuit clarified the point-of-novelty test for design patents when the point of novelty is a combination of existing design elements. The court adopted the rule that "to constitute a point of novelty, the combinations must be a non-trivial advance over the prior art." The court likened this analysis to an obviousness inquiry of a validity analysis. In a stron.......
Read More


Analysis of overall appearance determines whether patented design is dictated by function
November 19, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
In PHG Technologies, LLC v. St. John Companies, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated the preliminary injunction of the district court finding St. John raised a substantial questions of validity of the two patents-at-issue.At issue were two design patents owned by PHG: the '405 and '197 patents. The '405 and '197 patents depend from a utility patent for patient identification labels.......
Read More


View all Filewrapper® Posts

Search Posts

Purpose

The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

Disclaimer

McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.