Original Air Date 4.20.22
This course has expired and is no-longer eligible for CLE.
Recent Federal Circuit decisions in Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., 938 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2019) and In re SurgiSil, L.L.P., 14 F.4th 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2021)usher in fundamental change to U.S. design patent law whereby the scope of a design patent is now limited to the article(s) of manufacture identified in the title and/or claim of a design patent. Constricting design patents in this way puts the US design law at odds with European design law where the scope of protection afforded design rights is “not limited to the product in which the contested design is intended to be incorporated or applied” (European Court of Justice, Joined Cases C-361/15 P and C-405/15 P,Easy Sanitary v EUIPO/Group Nivelles, ECLI:EU:C:2017:720).
The emergence of this divide provides a welcome opportunity to conduct a comparative analysis of U.S. and E.U design law, with focus on the scope and role of prior art when determining issues of infringement, claim construction/scope of protection, anticipation, and obviousness/individual character.This course has expired and is no-longer eligible for CLE.
Recent Federal Circuit decisions in Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., 938 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2019) and In re SurgiSil, L.L.P., 14 F.4th 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2021)usher in fundamental change to U.S. design patent law whereby the scope of a design patent is now limited to the article(s) of manufacture identified in the title and/or claim of a design patent. Constricting design patents in this way puts the US design law at odds with European design law where the scope of protection afforded design rights is “not limited to the product in which the contested design is intended to be incorporated or applied” (European Court of Justice, Joined Cases C-361/15 P and C-405/15 P,Easy Sanitary v EUIPO/Group Nivelles, ECLI:EU:C:2017:720).
Two well-known experts in the field of design law, Christopher V. Carani (US) and Henning Hartwig (DE-EU), will lead the discussion providing insights and practice tips along the way.
Presented by: Christopher Carani of McAndrews, Held & Malloy, Ltd. and Henning Hartwig of Bardehle Pagenberg
AIPLA is an approved provider by most jurisdictions requiring CLE. Each program requires individual jurisdiction approval, and each jurisdiction has different approval guidelines and time frames so programs may not be pre-approved for CLE. Program accreditation is sought in all attendee requested jurisdictions and may be available for up to one year after the original air date. Specialized credits (Ethics, Elimination of Bias, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Technology, etc.) approval varies by jurisdiction. CLE reporting and/or certificates of attendance may take up to 4 weeks for processing.
For information on CLE accreditation and processing, please contact the AIPLA CLE Department at cle@aipla.org.