Sarah Fackrell

In a case involving design patents for a unicorn-shaped pool float & a unicorn-shaped inflatable cupholder, Covves moves to prevent Target from presenting evidence of prior art including:

- “The Unicorn in Captivity” tapestry

- "A photo of statuary on the Old State House in Boston"; and

- "A design patent for a “My Little Pony” children’s toy."

https://www.scribd.com/document/697953861/Covves-v-Target-Motion-in-Limine

#DesignPatents #UnicornPoolFloats

Jan 10, 2024 at 1:14pmWeb
Show threadSarah FackrellJan 10, 2024

Covves is right that these types of references can't be used in the infringement analysis, under #ColumbiaVersusSeirus.

See Columbia Sportswear N. Am., Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., 80 F.4th 1363, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2023) ("[T]o qualify as comparison prior art, the prior-art design must be applied to the article of manufacture identified in the claim.")

Show threadSarah FackrellJan 10, 2024
Target might argue that it wants to present these exhibits for some other purpose, though. I guess we'll see.
Show threadMeredith LowryJan 11, 2024
@design_law I kind of want to buy Covves counsel a sympathy drink. I can't imagine how much sarcasm and disdain he removed from the initial draft of that filing.