LexBlog IP

JANUARY 18, 2023

The parties faced off in a rematch at the Federal Circuit following an earlier bout involving the same design patent, U.S. which each address the issue of determining the article of manufacture, but for different stages of the patent process. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. and Curver Luxembourg, SARL, v.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Art 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 9, 2022

A design patent 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.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

The IP Law Blog

JUNE 9, 2022

A design patent 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.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

IP Watchdog

NOVEMBER 14, 2023

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued its one millionth design patent on September 26, 2023. D1,000,000 claims the ornamental design for a dispensing comb. This milestone comes during a particularly prolific period for design patents.

Design Patent 59

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 59

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 2, 2023

Design patents and utility patents are two different things. Design patents 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.

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

JANUARY 5, 2022

With these technical advances comes an increase in legal activity, including intellectual property (“IP”) filings and litigation. Research and development in the battery industry have led to a notable increase in patent filings at the U.S. Intellectual Property Considerations. district courts, the U.S.

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Technology Journalism IP 52

LexBlog IP

APRIL 12, 2022

the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s finding that Gamon’s design patents on gravity-fed displays for soup were non-obvious. Fox Factory , said the court, is not limited to assessing secondary considerations of non-obviousness of utility patents, but also applies to design patents. Gamon Plus, Inc. ,

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

Patently-O

MARCH 13, 2022

Angus Liu : Roche Settles Lawsuit Claiming AstraZeneca’s Ultomiris Infringes Delivery Patent (Source: Fierce Pharma). Solomon Israel: Court Tosses Canopy Cannabis Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against GW Pharma (Source: MJ Biz Daily). Commentary and Journal Articles: Prof. IP Edge LLC – Patent Analyst .

Patent Prosecution 68

Patent Prosecution Intellectual Property Patent Journalism 68

LexBlog IP

NOVEMBER 15, 2022

As further explained below, companies should thus very seriously consider the inclusion of patent markings on all relevant products. Design Patent No. 13, 2015, which was the design patent asserted in the matter noted above. Examples of proper patent markings include “Patent D654,321” and “Pat.

Cease and Desist 52

Cease and Desist Design Patent Patent Designs 52

LexBlog IP

MARCH 3, 2023

In its complaint, Skull Shaver claimed that Ideavillage’s leg shaver infringed its design patent on a head shaver. The patent-in-suit is U.S. D693,060 (“the D’060 patent”) for an electric head shaver, and the accused product is a Flawless Legs Shaver, which is itself covered by U.S.

Designs 52

Designs Design Design Patent Art 52

LexBlog IP

MARCH 6, 2023

With the increased funding pouring into this sector has come a desire to protect the intellectual property in the products, research, and developments brought to market. Coastal Harvest, LLC , denied a Motion to Dismiss asserting the illegality doctrine against cannabis related patents for extracting compounds from plant materials.

Litigation 52

Litigation Patent Design Patent Patent Application 52

Patently-O

APRIL 17, 2024

This case began back in 2006 when Crocs sued Double Diamond and others for patent infringement of Crocs’s design patents. Therefore, Dastar ‘s unaccredited copying did not constitute a false designation of origin actionable under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions.

False Advertising 114

False Advertising Advertising Advertising Patent 114

IP Watchdog

OCTOBER 29, 2022

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against hoverboard products alleged to infringe four design patents 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.

Design Patent 123

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 123

IIPRD

OCTOBER 17, 2022

In the present case too there will be many legal issues related to Intellectual Property. There is an urgent need to shed some light on intellectual property infringement in this virtual world which will be dealt with further in the article. Intellectual Property and Metaverse.

IP 52

IP Non-Fungible Tokens Intellectual Property Trademark 52

IP Watchdog

JUNE 28, 2022

Leader Accessories LLC reversing a contempt finding entered in the Western District of Wisconsin over alleged violations of a protective order from a design patent infringement case between Static and Leader. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision in Static Media LLC v.

Confidentiality 59

Confidentiality Design Patent Patent Infringement Designs 59

IP Watchdog

FEBRUARY 10, 2022

District Court for the District of Pennsylvania’s summary judgment that a medical device design patent 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.

Design Patent 119

Design Patent Designs Design Business 119