As we predicted in our 2023 report, 2024 was a banner year for design rights in the U.S. and elsewhere. In last year’s report, we noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) agreed to consider en banc...more
1/23/2025
/ Appeals ,
CAFC ,
Canada ,
China ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Design Patent ,
EU ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Riyadh Design Law Treaty ,
Ukraine ,
USPTO ,
WIPO
On May 21, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled more than 40 years of precedent defining the design patent obviousness standard. The decision eliminates the Rosen-Durling test,...more
For the first time in over five years, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will be hearing a patent case en banc. The Court has agreed to hear LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, which...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
2/21/2023
/ Anticipation ,
Appeals ,
Article of Manufacture ,
Australia ,
Chile ,
China ,
Claim Construction ,
Damages ,
Design Patent ,
EU ,
Exclusion Orders ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Foreign Patent Applications ,
India ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Jury Verdicts ,
Likelihood of Success ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Noninfringement ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Registration ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Prior Art ,
Remedies ,
Reversal ,
Section 337 ,
Settlement Agreements ,
Summary Judgment ,
The Hague System ,
Trade Dress ,
United Arab Emirates (UAE) ,
USPTO
While petitioners are successful over 60% of the time in getting the PTAB to institute trial on patents in the biotech, chemical, electrical/computer, mechanical, and business method arts, that is not the case for design...more
As of January 2017, the institution rate for Patent Trial and Appeal Board trials involving design patents was 37 percent. That is significantly lower than every other technology area and makes design patents the only...more
5/25/2017
/ Biotechnology ,
Design Patent ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Priority Patent Claims ,
USPTO
Decision Date: March 31, 2015 -
Court: U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board -
Patents: D622,531 -
Holding: Examiner’s decision in reexamination proceeding not to adopt Requester’s obviousness rejections REVERSED...more
Decision Date: April 21, 2014 and April 14, 2015 -
Court: Patent Trial and Appeal Board and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit -
Patents: D617,465 -
Holding: Claimed design is obvious and therefore...more
Decision Dates: September 11, 2013 and March 26, 2014 -
Courts: Federal Circuit and the Southern District of New York Patent: D598,183 -
Holding: Grant of summary judgment of invalidity REVERSED and REMANDED; on...more
Decision Date: March 21, 2014 -
Court: Patent Trial and Appeal Board -
Patents: D652,922 -
Holding: Petition to Institute Inter Partes Review DENIED -
Opinion:
Medtronic, Inc. filed a petition...more
Decision Date: April 21, 2014 -
Court: Patent Trial and Appeal Board -
Patents: D617,465 -
Holding: Claimed design is obvious and therefore UNPATENTABLE -
Opinion:
Petitioners Munchkin, Inc. and Toys...more
Decision Date: April 2, 2014 -
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit -
Patents: D634,488 and D634,487 -
Holding: N.D. of Ohio’s Grant of Summary Judgment of Invalidity AFFIRMED...more
Decision Date: January 31, 2013 -
Court: N.D. Ohio -
Patents: D634,488 and D634,487 -
Holding: Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of invalidity GRANTED -
Opinion: Plaintiff MRC Innovations,...more