Bayramoglu Law Offices LLC
+1 (702) 462-5973
ask@bayramoglu-legal.com
Twitter
  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • PATENT
    • TRADEMARK
    • COPYRIGHT
    • LITIGATION
    • BUSINESS LAW
  • TEAM
  • NEWS
  • CAREERS
  • CONTACT

Blog

The Significance of Words in a Design Patent

October 21, 2020adminNews1 Comment

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit stated that the title and claim language can limit the scope of a design patent when the patent’s drawings don’t indicate what type of product is involved. The court’s reasoning could have significant ramifications for design patent law.

When considering the scope of a design patent, judges typically focus on the drawings that are included in the patent. People have been unsure about the importance of the patent’s title and its claim when it comes to the scope of protection.

Most patent applicants generally have not been overly concerned if a patent examiner asks them to change the title of an application.

In the case Curver Luxembourg SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., Curver applied for a patent covering a “design for a furniture part.” Responding to an examiner’s suggestion, the company changed the patent to refer to a chair. The ruling illustrates the need to be careful when drafting the title and claim language.

It is advised to be careful when it comes to changing the title and the claim language. A small change may cause the narrowing of the claim scope.

Based on this ruling by the Federal Circuit, it is better to attempt to use broader titles in an effort to gain broader coverage.

Trying to get a broader scope by way of using broader title and claim may cause prosecution issues as the USPTO may push for narrower title and claim.

We believe there may be a conflict between the Federal Circuit’s ruling in Curver and the USPTO’s rule regarding novelty.

Patent examination manual states that “anticipation does not require that the claimed design and the prior art be from analogous arts.” That means an examiner could, for example, find a pattern for a chair is un-patentable because it is anticipated by a pattern on a basket.

The axiom in patent law is: “That which infringes if later, anticipates if earlier.” The basic idea is that the scope for infringement and anticipation are supposed to be the same. If a basket can’t infringe a pattern for a chair, there is an argument the basket shouldn’t be able to anticipate it either.

We believe the USPTO will re-evaluate their current rule based on the decision of the Federal Circuit.

In the meantime, we will use this case law to argue against possible Examiner’s request for narrowing the title or claim of an application.

This may be the right time to evaluate the policy of single claim in design patents. If multiple claims in a design patent are allowed, one claim could identify a pattern for a chair, another a pattern for a rug, another a pattern for a basket, etc.

The case is Curver Luxembourg SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., case number 18-2214, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

admin
Previous Post Success Story for Our Client after Appealing the Case Next Post US Supreme Court Decision Regarding PTAB Judges

1 Comment. Leave new

film izle
January 16, 2021 4:50 pm

Thanks a lot for the article post. Really thank you! Great. Sibella Darrell Graubert

Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives

  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • October 2020
  • July 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • May 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • December 2017
  • June 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • December 2014
  • September 2014
  • July 2014

Every Person Who Walks Through Our Door Is
Important To Us

Request Consultatıon
Our Expertises

º Patent
º Trademark
º Copyright
º Litigation Srv.
º Business Law

USA

1540 West Warm Springs Road
Suite 100
Henderson, NV 89014
Phone: +1 (702) 462 5973
ask@bayramoglu-legal.com

233 S. Wacker Drive
44th Floor, #57
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: +1 (702) 462 5973
ask@bayramoglu-legal.com

EUROPE

Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Bulvarı,
5387.Cadde Beytepe, 06800,
Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey

CHINA

Room C503 5/F, SCE Building No:212, Gaoqi Nanwu Road, Huli District, Xiamen City, Fujian Province, China

HOME PAGE

SITE MAP

CONTACT

© 2021 | bayramoglu-legal.com | Designed by ANL Creative