Sarah FackrellOct 13
Would an identical real tooth count as "analogous art" under #LKQvGM? Or as an anticipatory piece of prior art under #CurviSil?

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:hvwhptk4oerwsuzau66ikwfy/post/3m34ahutpoc2d
Sarah FackrellSep 11, 2025
In design patent law, we got #CurviSil: - Curver: www.cafc.uscourts.gov/9-12-2019-18... - SurgiSil: www.cafc.uscourts.gov/10-04-2021-2... And while SCOTUS' decision in #appsung leaves a lot to be desired, at least it rejected the Federal Circuit's read of § 289: www.oyez.org/cases/2016/1...

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:2darfo36xds4oznvip7x2ux7/post/3lylc2hg2gk2h
Sarah FackrellMay 26, 2025
Someone asked a question that made me realize that, even if these components did look the same, this case might raise an interesting #CurviSil issue: Does this defendant sell "an animal paw shaped pet treat dispensing puzzle"?

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:hvwhptk4oerwsuzau66ikwfy/post/3lq36ueeqdc2j

USD676202S1 - Animal paw shape...
Bluesky

Bluesky Social
Show threadSarah FackrellApr 11, 2025
Side note: It looks like there's a #CurviSil issue here, too. The patent claims a design "for a sponge headband." Are the accused products sponges? Made of sponge? What does "sponge" even mean in this context? It matters.
Bluesky

Bluesky Social
Sarah FackrellApr 6, 2025
I'll add, just for fun: Under U.S. law, the Lotus could theoretically be relevant to the question of design patent infringement at Goddess step 2. But that would require someone to actually make the underwater vehicle. See #CurviSil. And for that vehicle to not be "plainly dissimilar." See Goddess
Bluesky

Bluesky Social
Show threadSarah FackrellApr 5, 2025
And because the #CurviSil, this could be relevant to situations where a registered product design is shown in a parodic book, play, or film, right?
Bluesky

Bluesky Social
Show threadSarah FackrellFeb 2, 2025
I'll also say: Our § 102 rule (i.e., #CurviSil) is a good one. If you'd like to know more, here is the article the Federal Circuit cited in Curver and that the appellant drew from extensively at oral argument in SurgiSil:

The Patented Design
Bluesky

Bluesky Social
Sarah FackrellJul 5, 2024

In 2019, the Federal Circuit ruled (by necessary implication) that a basket cannot be a commercial embodiment of this patent. https://cafc.uscourts.gov/9-12-2019-18-2214-curver-luxembourg-sarl-v-home-expressions-inc-opinion-precedential-18-2214-opinion-9-12-2019/

But check out what I just bought at Target.

#DesignPatents #CurviSil

18-2214: CURVER LUXEMBOURG, SARL v. HOME EXPRESSIONS INC. [OPINION], Precedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Opinions/Orders posted: CURVER LUXEMBOURG, SARL v. HOME EXPRESSIONS INC. [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 18-2214 Origin: DCT Precedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Show threadSarah FackrellMay 22, 2024

10) 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?

#LKQvGM #CurviSil

Show threadSarah FackrellMay 20, 2024
Also, I am biased but I think #CurviSil was right. Don't love the broadside attack here.