May 21, 2015
Managing Intellectual Property
On May 18, 2015, the Federal Circuit ruled in Apple v. Samsung, finding that Samsung infringed Apple’s design patents and utility patents and awarded Apple approximately $1 billion. Despite ruling in Apple’s favor on the design and utility patents, the court ruled that Apple’s registered and unregistered trade dresses were not protectable. Managing Intellectual Property reached to Finnegan attorneys Douglas A. Rettew and Elizabeth D. Ferrill for their thoughts on the case.
The court found that Apple’s registered and unregistered trade dress were not protectable because the claimed features were functional rather than for the sole purpose of identification. This stood out to Rettew who believed the Federal Circuit used an extraordinarily high standard for functionality in comparison to other courts. The decision also provided guidance for claim construction of design patents, specifically how to treat the functional parts of a claim. Citing the Richardson v. Stanley Works, Inc. case, Samsung argued that the functional elements of the claim should be ignored when considering the scope of the design patent. In Apple v. Samsung, the Federal Circuit clarified Richardson, which actually states that the claim construction should not be ignored and in fact should include the ornamental aspects of functional components. Ferrill noted that this application of Richardson is heard regularly but often misunderstood, and she believes the clarification that the Federal Circuit provided is needed.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), Apple, Inc., trade dress, claim construction
Commentary
World IP Day: EPO Reveals 33% Jump in Cleantech Inventions Over Five Years
April 26, 2024
Award/Ranking
Finnegan Named Firm of the Year at the 2024 Managing Intellectual Property Americas Awards
April 26, 2024
Award/Ranking
Finnegan Shortlisted for the 2024 Asian Legal Business Japan Law Awards
April 26, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.