What is the legal basis for rejecting design patent applications that simulate existing objects?

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

The legal basis for rejecting design patent applications that simulate existing objects stems from the originality requirement in 35 U.S.C. 171. The MPEP 1504.01(d) explains:

“35 U.S.C. 171 requires that a design to be patentable be ‘original.’ Clearly, a design which simulates an existing object or person is not original as required by the statute.”

This interpretation is supported by significant case law, including:

• Gorham Manufacturing Co. v. White: Described a design as “the thing invented or produced, for which a patent is given.”
• In re Smith: Established that “to take a natural form, in a natural pose, … does not constitute invention.”

Based on these principles, the USPTO instructs examiners to reject claims for designs that merely simulate well-known objects or natural forms under 35 U.S.C. 171 as lacking originality. This ensures that design patents are granted only for truly original and inventive designs.