Design Patent Law Update
•
3 recomendaciones•1,162 vistas
Design Patent Design Update given at Global Patent Academy
![U.S. Design Patent Law Update United States Patent and Trademark Office Global Intellectual Property Academy - March 19 ,2010 Darrell G. Mottley, Banner & Witcoff, LTD [email_address]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/mottleygipa2010presentation-12714695644756-phpapp01/85/Design-Patent-Law-Update-1-320.jpg)
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (12)
Similar a Design Patent Law Update
Similar a Design Patent Law Update (20)
Design Patent Law Update
- 1. U.S. Design Patent Law Update United States Patent and Trademark Office Global Intellectual Property Academy - March 19 ,2010 Darrell G. Mottley, Banner & Witcoff, LTD [email_address]
- 2. Agenda - U.S. Design Patent Law Update
- 3. Design Patent Infringement Law UPDATE FROM 2008 AND BEYOND
- 6. INFRINGEMENT CASE LAW UPDATE
- 7. In Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa , the full Federal Circuit altered this two test framework for determining design patent infringement, all in the context of . . . Fingernail Buffers INFRINGEMENT CASE LAW UPDATE
- 8. Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa (Fed. Cir. 2008) (En Banc) Accused Design Patented Design D467,389 Swisa Nail Buffer Egyptian Goddess
- 13. Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa INFRINGEMENT ANALYSIS
- 15. Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa INFRINGEMENT “CONTEXTUAL” ANALYSIS Accused Design Patented Design D467,389 Prior Art Prior Art
- 16. Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa (Fed. Cir. 2008) (En Banc) Accused Design Patented Design D467,389 Swisa Nail Buffer Egyptian Goddess
- 19. Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission 04/17/10 US Pat. D517,789 Representative Figures
- 26. Crocs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission US Pat. D517,789 Effervescent Waldies AT shoe SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISION
- 28. DESIGN PATENT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION Case Law Update
- 31. DESIGN PATENT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION EXAMPLES Pre-Egyptian Goddess
- 36. DESIGN PATENT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION EXAMPLES Post-Egyptian Goddess
- 43. International Seaway v. Walgreens 589 F.3d 1233 Figure 1 of Crocs ‘789 Patent (Prior Art ) Figure 1 of Seaway’s ‘263 Patent Figure 2 of Crocs ‘789 Patent (Prior Art) Figure 2 of Seaway’s ‘263 Patent
- 44. Figure 6 of Crocs ’789 Patent Figure 6 of Seaway’s ’263 Patent International Seaway v. Walgreens 589 F.3d 1233
Notas del editor
- Point of Novelty Test No Longer Applicable For Design Patent Anticipation? “ In light of Supreme Court precedent and our precedent holding that the same tests must be applied to infringement and anticipation, and our holding in Egyptian Goddess that the ordinary observer test is the sole test for infringement, we now conclude that the ordinary observer test must logically be the sole test for anticipation as well. In doing so, we will prevent an inconsistency from developing between the infringement and anticipation analyses, and we will continue our well-established practice of maintaining identical tests for infringement and anticipation.”
- Large question of “Substantial Similarity” as a New Standard for Design Patent Obviousness Not Clear how to apply Many questions on who is the ordinary observer Not the “holding” of the case