How are amendments to design patent applications evaluated for new matter?
Amendments to design patent applications are carefully evaluated to ensure they do not introduce new matter not supported by the original disclosure. Key points include: Any changes must have support in the original disclosure Converting solid lines to broken lines (or vice versa) is generally not new matter Adding or removing surface ornamentation may be…
Read MoreWhat is the definition of an ornamental feature or design in patent law?
An ornamental feature or design is defined as one that was “created for the purpose of ornamenting” and cannot be the result or “merely a by-product” of functional or mechanical considerations. This definition comes from the case In re Carletti, where the court stated: “An ornamental feature or design has been defined as one which…
Read MoreWhat are the criteria for determining ornamentality in design patents?
The criteria for determining ornamentality in design patents are outlined in MPEP 1504.01(c). Key factors include: The design must be visible during normal use of the article The design should not be dictated solely by function The appearance of the design must have some decorative purpose As stated in the MPEP: “In determining whether a…
Read MoreHow does a continuation-in-part (CIP) application affect benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120 for design patents?
A continuation-in-part (CIP) application can affect benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120 for design patents in the following ways: The claimed design in a CIP application must be disclosed in the original application to be entitled to the benefit of the earlier filing date. If the design in the CIP is not fully disclosed in…
Read MoreWhat are the consequences of failing to timely submit a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 in a design patent application?
Failing to timely submit a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 in a design patent application can have significant consequences: The application may lose the benefit of the earlier filing date. It may be considered a waiver of any benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c). The loss of the earlier filing date…
Read MoreWhat are computer-generated icons in the context of design patents?
Computer-generated icons are 2-dimensional images, such as full screen displays and individual icons, that can be subject to design patent protection when embodied in articles of manufacture. According to MPEP 1504.01(a): “The USPTO considers designs for computer-generated icons embodied in articles of manufacture to be statutory subject matter eligible for design patent protection under 35…
Read MoreCan a design for a computer-generated icon be patented?
Can a design for a computer-generated icon be patented? Yes, a design for a computer-generated icon can be patented. The MPEP 1504.01(a) states: “Computer-generated icons, such as full screen displays and individual icons, are 2-dimensional images which alone are surface ornamentation. See, e.g., Ex parte Strijland, 26 USPQ2d 1259 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1992)…
Read MoreHow are multiple references combined in design patent obviousness rejections?
The MPEP provides guidance on combining multiple references in design patent obviousness rejections: “A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 would be appropriate if a designer of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify a primary reference by deleting features thereof or by interchanging with or adding features from pertinent secondary references.” However, the MPEP…
Read MoreHow are combination and subcombination designs treated in design patent applications?
Combination and subcombination designs in design patent applications are treated as follows: A design claim covers the entire design as a whole and does not extend to individual parts. Embodiments of different scope (e.g., a whole product and a part of that product) can be included in a single application if they are not patentably…
Read MoreWhat types of patents can be managed using the Classification Manager tool?
The Classification Manager tool is specifically designed for managing the classification of design patents. The MPEP clearly states: “The Classification Manager tool is available only for design patents.” This means that utility patents and plant patents are not managed through this particular tool. Patent examiners working with design patents can use the Classification Manager to…
Read More