Blue Spring v. #ScheduleA - This complaint (filed by Boies Schiller) is going in my all-time worst design patent infringement claims file:
https://www.scribd.com/document/708509893/Blue-Spring-v-Schedule-A-Complaint
Not only are the two design patent infringement claims that are actually alleged in the complaint absolutely baseless, the plaintiff (or perhaps more correctly, their attorneys) don't seem to understand the difference between a design patent and a utility patent.
This first patent is NOT a design patent.
How do I know, without even pulling up the patent?
Well, the drawing was the first clue.
Then there's the number. There are not even 2 million DPs, let alone 9 million.
But maybe the "D" was just a typo. Let's see.
No, they seriously seem to think this is a DP. (It is not.)
For actual design patents, yes, we compare the figures in the patent to the accused products.
That is NOT the test for utility patent infringement.
This is really basic stuff.
And as you all know, ยง 289 damages are only available for certain acts of design patent infringement. They are not available for any acts of utility patent infringement.
Anyway, here are the pictures in the complaint that show the asserted DP and two accused product. Neither of these products infringe this design patent.
And it's not even close.
Oh, by the way, this is not Boies' first #ImproperDisgorgementDemand:
Sarah Fackrell