“Internal Inconsistencies Limit Design Patent Decision’s Utility”

June 24, 2019
Law360

Law360 published an article, "Internal Inconsistencies Limit Design Patent Decision's Utility," by Partner Jeremy Kriegel on June 24, 2019.

On May 16, 2019, Judge Ronald Lew of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued a decision in Kao v. Snow Monster Inc.,[1] denying an accused infringer’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Design Patent D577601 for a lightbulb-shaped juice bottle.

The opinion addressed several issues common to design patent infringement litigation, including whether the court should provide a verbal description of the claimed design (versus merely referencing the drawing figures of the design patent); whether to compare the accused product to a commercial embodiment of the patented design (versus only comparing the accused product to the patent); to what extent functional features of a design patent should impact the infringement analysis; whether features added to an accused product can be sufficient to avoid infringement; and what role should prior art play in determining whether to grant summary judgment of noninfringement.

Readers may access Jeremy's full article "Internal Inconsistencies Limit Design Patent Decision's Utility" on Law360 online.