design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

One thing I like about the decision in is that it provides a good example of "how close is too close" in design patent law.

The court says these products are not close enough to anticipate. That means they would not, if later, be close enough to infringe.

http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/21-2348.OPINION.5-21-2024_2321050.pdf

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

We are reconvening our all-star panel to discuss the decision in . Please join us next Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at noon Eastern via Zoom.

More details and the (free) registration link here:

https://events.suffolk.edu/event/design-patents-after-the-en-banc-decision-in-lkq-v-gm

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Thinking about the use of the passive voice in this passage from :

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Some more assorted thoughts on :

design_law,
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
  1. One interesting question that remains is:

LKQ x CurviSil = ???

In other words, how does/should the fact that design patents protect applied designs (not designs per se) affect the scope of § 103 prior art, if at all?

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Law360 coverage of , featuring some comments from me and several high-profile design practitioners:
https://www.law360.com/ip/articles/1839570?nl_pk=2e71aa9c-c8f8-43ff-9d5a-fafec61b2085

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Okay, got two #LKQvGM panels in the works. One online, soon; one in Chicago, in the fall. Stay tuned. #DesignPatents #RestInPeaceRosen

design_law, (edited ) to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Will GM file a cert petion?

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Would have been hilarious if the Federal Circuit released today. But alas.

meredithlowry, to random
@meredithlowry@mastodon.social avatar

Today in design patents:

D1020281 issued for a chair for outdoors.

design_law,
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

@asbestos @meredithlowry Pretty darned close (this patent is a good example). For more on why, see this short piece: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3329899

It's possible that the Federal Circuit might change the rules in . I don't expect a huge change, but I guess we'll see.

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Just out of curiosity, I looked up when the last Federal Circuit en banc design patent case, , was argued (6/2/08) and decided (9/22/08).

If were to follow the same timeline, we could expect a decision around late May.

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Look, if In re Rosen (1982) isn't too old to overrule, then neither is In re Zahn (1980).

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

"The judges seemed interested in tweaking the existing 'Rosen-Durling' test but struggled with getting the parties to clearly articulate a replacement approach wouldn’t be potentially just as bad."

  • Eileen McDermott via IP Watchdog

https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/02/05/lkq-en-banc-argument-suggests-cafc-could-soften-test-design-patent-obviousness/id=172880

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Last question in :

Judge: If we could only make one change [to the § 103 analysis], what should we change?

Lemley: Overrule Rosen/Durling

Judge: "That's not going to happen."

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Let's go! Panel will be Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, Stark (everyone but Newman and Cunningham):

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Today is the day! will be argued before the en banc Federal Circuit today at 10 a.m. Eastern.

Audio link: https://cafc.uscourts.gov/home/oral-argument/listen-to-oral-arguments/

Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66745365/lkq-corporation-v-gm-global-technology-operations-llc/?order_by=desc

Here's a short preview from @patentlyo: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/02/corporation-global-design.html

If you're interested in a deeper dive into the issue, here's an article I wrote: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1926162

For an update to my views on primary references, see § IV(C)(2) here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4496762

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

BLaw covers the biggest design patent case of the year, with some commentary from me: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/rare-federal-circuit-en-banc-patent-case-threatens-design-test

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar
design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Upcoming patent events of interest (including our panel), via @patentlyo: https://patentlyo.com/patent/2024/01/three-upcoming-events.html

design_law, to random
@design_law@mastodon.social avatar

Please join Suffolk Law on February 6 for an online panel discussion on LKQ v. GM, moderated by me and featuring @patentlyo, @meredithlowry, Darrell Mottley (Howard Law) & Laura Sheridan (Google).

Get the details and register (for free) here: https://events.suffolk.edu/event/design_patents_en_banc_lkq_v_gm

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • mdbf
  • InstantRegret
  • ethstaker
  • magazineikmin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • rosin
  • modclub
  • Youngstown
  • ngwrru68w68
  • slotface
  • osvaldo12
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • Leos
  • thenastyranch
  • everett
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • normalnudes
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • khanakhh
  • tacticalgear
  • tester
  • provamag3
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines