Building a Cost-Effective Global Patent Portfolio Using the Netherlands
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Conflicting Application in China’s Patent System
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
The Patent Process | Interview with Patent Attorney, Robert Greenspoon
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Nonpublication Requests For Patent Applications: Disadvantages
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
Is The Deck Stacked Against Patent Owners In The PTAB?
What the First-to-File Patent Change Means (And What IP Strategists Should Do About It)
In today’s competitive market, the visual appeal and unique ornamental design of a product can be as crucial to its success as its name or functionality. Protecting the distinctive look and feel of your company’s products can...more
One month after the Federal Circuit altered the obviousness standard for design patents in a much-anticipated en banc decision in LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, an Arizona federal judge in Cozy...more
Those following this blog knew change was coming to design patent obviousness in the LKQ v. GM decision by the en banc Federal Circuit. In its May 21, 2024 decision, the court overruled the long-standing Rosen-Durling test...more
Upending decades of continuity in the world of design patents, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), sitting en banc in LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, overturned the...more
Before Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
Now a more flexible Graham v. John Deere analysis applies. On May 21, 2024, the en banc Federal Circuit overruled the Rosen-Durling test for design patent obviousness, holding that Supreme Court law dictates "a more...more
On Tuesday, the en banc Federal Circuit released its highly anticipated decision in LKQ v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, rejecting as “improperly rigid” the previous standard for evaluating whether a design patent is...more
The en banc Federal Circuit has overruled the Rosen-Durling test for design patent obviousness, holding that the Supreme Court’s KSR decision dictated “a more flexible approach . . . for determining non-obviousness.” LKQ v....more
In 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued three opinions regarding U.S. design patents. The three 2023 opinions are Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., LKQ...more
Changes to design patent validity law may be coming thanks to LKQ v. GM, a case that we’ve been tracking since April 2021. On February 5, 2024, in a rare en banc hearing, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit asked...more
All three of the challenges that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted in 2022 resulted in a final written decision canceling the challenged patent. Two of the three final written decisions rendered in 2023 are...more
2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more
As we have previously written about, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) has granted a petition for an en banc rehearing of LKQ Corp. et al v. GM Global Technology to rule on the...more
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals recently narrowed the scope of “comparison prior art” that may be used in a design patent infringement analysis. “Comparison prior art” includes references used to help highlight...more
The technical problem actually solved by an invention should be determined based on distinguishing technical feature of the claims as compared with the most-related prior art and the technical effect can be known by a person...more
When the text, graphics, colors and arrangement and combinations attached to the goods or their packaging can distinguish the source of the goods, it constitutes the packaging and decoration with certain influence protected...more
Summary of the judgment - The defendant’s use of the picture of the tyre GST67 in its product brochure without the plaintiff’s permission during the validity term of the plaintiff’s patent constituted the act of offering...more
Legal basis of the judgment - Article 11 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Some Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Disputes over Infringement of Patent Rights gives the basic...more
A patent does not give the owner the right to do anything. Rather, it gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the claimed invention, which most...more
In Corephotonics, Ltd. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit partially signed off on Apple’s win before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidating a number of patents owned by Corephotonics relating to dual-aperture...more
In a much-anticipated opinion that addresses an issue of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit narrowed the scope of “comparison prior art”―prior art considered by the fact finder during an...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that “comparison prior art” used in infringement analysis in a design patent infringement must be applied to the same “article of manufacture” that is identified in the claim of the design...more
Addressing a matter of first impression concerning the scope of prior art relevant to a design patent infringement analysis, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that “to qualify as comparison prior art,...more
Last week, in a precedential decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) clarified the law on comparison prior art in design patent cases. In the decision, captioned Columbia Sportswear...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - NETFLIX, INC. v. DIVX, LLC [OPINION] (2022-1138, 9/11/2023) (Hughes, Stoll, and Stark) - Stoll, J. The Court vacated the Board’s finding that an asserted prior art...more