Filewrapper

USPTO Proposes New Rules that Would Create a New Design Patent Practitioner Bar

By Joseph M. Hallman

On May 16, 2023, the USPTO published proposed rules that provide for the creation of a new design patent practitioner bar. The proposed design patent practitioner bar would provide for a new designation of practitioner able to practice before the USPTO. This newly proposed designation allows individuals to be classified as design patent practitioners wherein […]

Continue Reading →

Design Patents Just Got Easier

By Kirk M. Hartung

In a short, four page, precedential opinion issued on October 4, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that design patents are limited to specific articles of  manufacture, and not a design in the abstract. In re Surgisil, L.L.P., case number 2020-1940. The patent applicant, Surgisil, filed a design patent […]

Continue Reading →

Right to Repair: Infringement or Exhaustion Part 2

This post is part 2 of a series of posts relating to a person’s right to repair your purchased products. Part 1 discussed the general background and several policy arguments surrounding both sides of this issue. This post will discuss the main patent laws and legal doctrine related to the right to repair. The central […]

Continue Reading →

Design Patents and Indefiniteness

By 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 determination includes, at […]

Continue Reading →

No Sympathy for Samsung

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 […]

Continue Reading →

Surge in Patent Applications Related to 3D Printing: Is Yours One of Them?

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 Harvard, and a […]

Continue Reading →

Broad Definition of “Article of Manufacture” Costs Apple $400M

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 […]

Continue Reading →

Apple v. Samsung-Part II, A Design Patent Breakdown

  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 […]

Continue Reading →

Bring on the New Year – What is in Store for IP in 2014?

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 […]

Continue Reading →

New and Useful – January 31, 2013

· 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 […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up