#designpatents — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #designpatents, aggregated by home.social.
-
It's design week in Copyright!
Today: Mazer through Star Athletica
Wednesday: A design patent interlude, using our (free) "One Day on Designs" supplement https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3890945
-
This is a new Kate Spade handbag. If someone wanted to challenge the design as obvious:
1) Would (or should) a real-life stop sign qualify as a proper primary reference, post-LKQ?
2) Assuming it would be, what kinds of record-supported evidence might the challenger use to "bridge the gap" between that reference and the final design here? E.g., where do you get "and make it glitter"? The thick white border? The tented shape. Etc.
-
Please join us at Chicago-Kent on Tuesday, September 3 for a panel discussion on the obviousness standard in design patent law, led by Chicago-Kent law professors.
Please RSVP here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScLaM4H_uZwUg-f0-AQTZ0CKunsmhZ9h9N3a3J0yuRT71dQkA/viewform?usp=sf_link
-
Looking forward to presenting my forthcoming article, "The Counterfeit Sham" at #IPSC2024 today.
Draft available here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4549909
And I guess now is as good a time as any to share: I'm rebranding!
I'll be publishing this article as "Sarah Fackrell" (FACK-rull).
The best is yet to come.
-
Save the date: We'll be doing a panel on #LKQvGM on-site at the Conviser Law Center from 12-1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 3, 2024. Hope you can join us!
-
Patently-O has a post today about patents for animated screen designs: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/07/animated-gui-design-patents.html
Professor Crouch mentions the subject matter issue, which we discuss here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PTO-C-2020-0068-0009
These types of claims often have originality issues:
-
Are you a law student or attorney who is interested in joining the design patent bar? If you haven't applied yet, why not?
-
One thing I like about the decision in #LKQvGM is that it provides a good example of "how close is too close" in design patent law.
The court says these products are not close enough to anticipate. That means they would not, if later, be close enough to infringe.
http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/21-2348.OPINION.5-21-2024_2321050.pdf
-
Interesting decision in one of the Cozy Comfort #ScheduleA cases:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842.173.0.pdf
On first skim, there are some missteps (e.g., the judge seems to be falling victim to concept fallacy at Goddess step 1) but, overall, it's nice to see a judge actually look closely at some of these claims.
There's also an interesting discussion on patent joinder, though the judge suggests any §299 might be cured by the trademark allegations.
-
Interesting decision in one of the Cozy Comfort #ScheduleA cases:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842.173.0.pdf
On first skim, there are some missteps (e.g., the judge seems to be falling victim to concept fallacy at Goddess step 1) but, overall, it's nice to see a judge actually look closely at some of these claims.
There's also an interesting discussion on patent joinder, though the judge suggests any §299 might be cured by the trademark allegations.
-
Interesting decision in one of the Cozy Comfort #ScheduleA cases:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842.173.0.pdf
On first skim, there are some missteps (e.g., the judge seems to be falling victim to concept fallacy at Goddess step 1) but, overall, it's nice to see a judge actually look closely at some of these claims.
There's also an interesting discussion on patent joinder, though the judge suggests any §299 might be cured by the trademark allegations.
-
Interesting decision in one of the Cozy Comfort #ScheduleA cases:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842.173.0.pdf
On first skim, there are some missteps (e.g., the judge seems to be falling victim to concept fallacy at Goddess step 1) but, overall, it's nice to see a judge actually look closely at some of these claims.
There's also an interesting discussion on patent joinder, though the judge suggests any §299 might be cured by the trademark allegations.
-
Interesting decision in one of the Cozy Comfort #ScheduleA cases:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842/gov.uscourts.ilnd.448842.173.0.pdf
On first skim, there are some missteps (e.g., the judge seems to be falling victim to concept fallacy at Goddess step 1) but, overall, it's nice to see a judge actually look closely at some of these claims.
There's also an interesting discussion on patent joinder, though the judge suggests any §299 might be cured by the trademark allegations.
-
We are reconvening our all-star panel to discuss the decision in #LKQvGM. Please join us next Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at noon Eastern via Zoom.
More details and the (free) registration link here:
https://events.suffolk.edu/event/design-patents-after-the-en-banc-decision-in-lkq-v-gm
-
The substance of the design patent infringement claims are not yet publicly-available but, judging from the prayer for relief....I'm not optimistic as to their quality:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.1.0.pdf
(For anyone who doesn't know, this allegation makes two deep, fundamental errors of law. You can't get both profits AND damages and profits cannot be trebled.)
#DesignPatents #ScheduleA #ImproperTreblingDemands #Remedies
-
Another good joinder decision out of the NDIL, this time from Judge Pacold:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.10.0_2.pdf
-
Another good joinder decision out of the NDIL, this time from Judge Pacold:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.10.0_2.pdf
-
Another good joinder decision out of the NDIL, this time from Judge Pacold:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.10.0_2.pdf
-
Another good joinder decision out of the NDIL, this time from Judge Pacold:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.10.0_2.pdf
-
Another good joinder decision out of the NDIL, this time from Judge Pacold:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648/gov.uscourts.ilnd.454648.10.0_2.pdf
-
Gaston Kroub, via Above the Law: "With the increased focus at the time on design patent issues ... the turning to Schedule A cases as an enforcement mechanism by the design patent plaintiffs bar is understandable. What is less palatable, however, is the co-opting of anti-counterfeiting rhetoric by that same bar — as well as by some jurists — in the design patent context." https://abovethelaw.com/2024/04/off-schedule-by-design/ #DesignPatents #ScheduleA #CounterfeitRhetoric
-
"The NPRM would also hike design patent filing and issuance fees. The USPTO notes that no maintenance fees are owed on design patents and that the USPTO has been subsidizing design patent examination with revenue from the utility patent side." - @patentlyo #DesignPatents #PatentFedi #CostlyDesigns
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/04/targeted-higher-compact.html
-
Skull Shaver v. Ideavillage: Federal Circuit affirms, per Rule 36, the district court's (entirely correct) ruling that the accused Ideavillage product does not infringe the asserted design patent:
Remember, a design patent protects the actual shape and/or surface design that is shown in the drawings, *not* the larger design or product concept.
-
Okay, so I don't have enough time to digest this all now, but even on first skim, there is LOTS of interesting stuff in this NPRM on patent fees: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/03/2024-06250/setting-and-adjusting-patent-fees-during-fiscal-year-2025
-
Via AIPLA: #DesignDay 2024 will be Thursday, May 9:
-
ICYMI: The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB conclusion that waffle design was anticipated by a Dunkin Donuts Belgian Waffle Breakfast Sandwich video: https://mastodon.social/@design_law/112050032886183399
-
Judge Gayles (SDFL) denies the #Birdrock motion for fees, finding that Birdrock isn't a prevailing party, that this isn't an exceptional case, and that "Plaintiff has not engaged in unreasonable or vexatious conduct."
But he rule that Birdrock is entitled to recover the money posted as a bond due to "Plaintiff's lack of diligence in identifying Birdrock as a party and restraining its assets."
The bond is $10k.
-
Blue Spring v. #ScheduleA - This complaint (filed by Boies Schiller) is going in my all-time worst design patent infringement claims file:
https://www.scribd.com/document/708509893/Blue-Spring-v-Schedule-A-Complaint
Not only are the two design patent infringement claims that are actually alleged in the complaint absolutely baseless, the plaintiff (or perhaps more correctly, their attorneys) don't seem to understand the difference between a design patent and a utility patent.
-
Following Judge Durkin's grant of summary judgment against their design patent infringement claims (https://mastodon.social/@design_law/111771619167432208), the "hoverboard" #ScheduleA plaintiffs have appealed (again).
For a discussion of their first appeal, see: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2022/10/guest-post-about.html
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
Today is the day! We've assembled an amazing panel to discuss the most important design patent case of the year (decade?), LKQ v. GM, including yesterday's arguments. Hope you can join us!
https://events.suffolk.edu/event/design_patents_en_banc_lkq_v_gm
-
Who's excited for Monday?
-
Jezign is back at it again, asserting its narrow shoe-sole design patent against products that don't infringe it (this time, ones sold by Poshmark):
https://www.scribd.com/document/700594731/Jezign-v-Poshmark-Complaint
-
Scrub Daddy accuses competitor of trademark, trade dress & design patent infringement, seems to be laboring under the #Concept Fallacy:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.552236/gov.uscourts.mdd.552236.1.0.pdf
-
E. Mishan & Sons, Inc. ("Emson") accuses Mark Feldstein & Associates, Inc. of utility patent, design patent & trade dress infringement:
https://www.scribd.com/document/699782501/Emson-v-MFA-Complaint
-
Hyper Ice sues Kohl's for utility & design patent infringement, doesn't include a single picture of any accused product:
https://www.scribd.com/document/699777253/Hyper-Ice-v-Kohl-s-Complaint-sans-exhibits
-
DURKIN GETS IT RIGHT ON DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.384154/gov.uscourts.ilnd.384154.686.0.pdf
On remand from the Federal Circuit, Judge Durkin (finally) rules that the plaintiff's design patent claims fail as a matter of law.
-
Delighted to be able to share a new version of my article on #CounterfeitRhetoric, now with 100% more Zorro content:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4549909
Comments welcome!
#LegalScholarship #LawFedi #LawProfs #PatentFedi #CounterfeitSham #ScheduleA #DesignPatents
-
Please join Suffolk Law on February 6 for our online panel discussion on LKQ v. GM.
Details and (free) registration link here: https://events.suffolk.edu/event/design_patents_en_banc_lkq_v_gm
#DesignPatents #LKQvGM #DesignPatentsEnBanc #PatentFedi #FederalCircuit
-
In November, a jury in Lansing, Michigan found that Opti-luxx was liable for infringing a utility patent and a design patent, both relating to illuminated signs for school buses.
Now, Opti-luxx has filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law on the design patent claim: https://www.scribd.com/document/697432537/Smarttrend-v-Optiluxx-Renewed-motion-for-JMOL
Shall we take a closer look?
#PatentFedi #PatentJuryTrials #UtilityPatents #DesignPatents #SmartrendVersusOptiluxx
-
Concept fallacy, hanging hooks edition: https://www.scribd.com/document/695064350/Jacki-Easlick-v-CJ-Emerald-Complaint
-
Concept fallacy, wastewater edition: https://www.scribd.com/document/695062605/Screenco-v-Cordova-Complaint
Remember, to infringe a design patent, the accused product has to look the same as the whole claimed design. It's not enough that it does the same thing. Or looks like *part* of the claimed design.