Design Patent Figures Are Not The Only Source of Claim Limitations
Contributed by Knobbe Martens. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.
CURVER LUXEMBOURG, SARL v. HOME EXPRESSIONS INC.
Before Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Summary: Claim language specifying the article of manufacture can limit the scope of a design patent where the article is not shown in the figures.
Curver’s design patent included figures for an ornamental design disembodied from any article of manufacture. Under 35 U.S.C. § 171, design patents are for a “new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture.” During prosecution, to address the examiner’s requirement that the patent designate a particular article, the applicant amended the title from “FURNITURE (PART OF-)” to “Pattern for a chair,” and made similar changes to the claim and figure descriptions. Curver asserted the patent against HEI’s baskets. The district court dismissed the suit because the patent was limited to chairs only, and the Federal Circuit affirmed. The Federal Circuit recognized that claim of a design patent is traditionally based on the figures. However, the Federal Circuit held that claim language can limit the scope of a design patent where the claim language supplies the only instance of an article of manufacture that appears nowhere in the figures.
Editor: Paul Stewart
Written by: Aaron S. Johnson & Mark Kachner
More insights
Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidation of Patent for Lack of Enablement of Claims Directed to a Method of Treating a Patient with a Unit Dosage in Wyeth Llc v Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals Lp
Written by : Eric Furman, Ph.D. and Ashley C. Morales Key Takeaway: Federal Circuit invalidates patent claims directed to a method for treating non-small cell lung cancer through administration of “a unit dosage” of an irreversible epidermal…
When About Becomes Indefinite Federal Circuit Provides Guidance for Life Science Patent Applications Regarding Limits of Approximation in Enviro Tech v Safe Foods
Written by : Jason J. Jardine and Kenneth O. Aruda, Ph.D. Key Takeaway: The term “about” remains useful in biotech and pharmaceutical claims, but only if the patent provides objective guidance about what the term means. Absent that guidance,…
When Any Patent Means No Patent Federal Circuit Reverses Non Specific Verdict
Written by : Brian C. Barnes and Sophia F. Zahn OLLNOVA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. v. ECOBEE TECHNOLOGIES ULC [OPINION] Before Chen , Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary : A verdict form…