Dyson files suit to enforce design and utility patents for its bladeless fan

Dyson, Inc. filed suit against Cornucopia Products in the District of Arizona to enforce design and utility patents directed to a bladeless fan.  The design patents at issue, D602,143 and D605,748, both claim the ornamental design for a fan, as shown to the right.  The D142 patent claim includes a cylindrical base, whereas the D748 claim is not limited by a base.

The utility patents at issue, 8,052,379 and 8,092,166, claim fan assemblies.

An image of Dyson's 12 inch fan is shown below alongside an image of the alleged infringing product.

Dyson's complaint alleges that 

The copying of Dyson’s fan is so pervasive that many parts of Cornucopia’s fan are interchangeable with the corresponding parts of Dyson’s fan.  For example, Cornucopia’s cylindrical air nozzle fits perfectly and locks into Dyson’s base.  And Dyson’s cylindrical air nozzle fits perfectly and locks into Cornucopia’s base.

Dyson's complaint further alleges that "Cornucopia’s copying of Dyson’s fan even extends to the number and position of screws for various parts, . . . the precise shapes of intricate internal components, which were designed by Dyson engineers," and "the figures of Dyson’s operating manual and assembly guide."

Digest of new and closed design patent cases from April 9-20, 2012

Wal-Mart and Oakley were among the parties to 8 newly-filed cases and 5 closed cases involving design patents during the two-week period of April 9-20, 2012.  A tabulated summary of these cases is posted here.  Some cases that we found particularly interesting are mentioned below.

Oakley, Inc. filed suit against Great L&H Trading, Inc. in the Central District of California alleging infringement of eyewear design and utility patents.  On the same day, Great L&H Trading filed a corresponding declaratory judgment action in the Southern District of New York.  This new case follows other Oakley eyewear design infringement suits that we previously reported on 02/10/12, 02/16/12, and 03/12/12.  Links to the patents at issue in this case are listed below.

D420,036        D622,755        D581,443

D581,444        D397,350        D399,866

D554,689        D404,754       

5,387,949       5,638,145 

Vinum Corp. and Oenaphilla, Inc. settled a lawsuit involving a combined bottle "aerator, filter, pourer, re-corker and stopper, all designed into one unit," as shown to the left.  Vinum's complaint alleged that Oenaphilla's Tappo Pour product infringed Vinum's D437,782 patent claiming a design for a bottle stopper. 

Sheng Yang Metal Co. and Wal-Mart Stores settled a lawsuit involving tool handle designs, shown below.  Shen Yang Metal's complaint alleged that Wal-Mart infringed two of its patents, D483644 and D486717, claiming designs for tool handles.

New proposed legislation to create design patent infringement exceptions for motor vehicle parts

On February 2, 2012, Representatives Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), members of the House Judiciary Committee, introduced H.R. 3889, a bill entitled the Promoting Automotive Repair, Trade, and Sales (PARTS) Act.

The proposed bill would create exceptions from acts of infringement under 35 USC 271 for certain component parts of motor vehicles.  Under the PARTS Act, with respect to a design patent that claims a component part of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured, “it shall not be an act of infringement of such design patent to make or offer to sell within the United States, or import into the United States, any article of manufacture that is similar or the same in appearance to the component part that is claimed in such design patent if the purpose of such article of manufacture is for the repair of a motor vehicle so as to restore such vehicle to its appearance as originally manufactured.”

Further, “after the expiration of a period of 30 months beginning on the first day on which any such component part is first offered to the public for sale as part of a motor vehicle in any country, it shall not be an act of infringement of such design patent to use or sell within the United States any article of manufacture that is similar or the same in appearance to the component part that is claimed in such design patent if the purpose of such article of manufacture is for the repair of a motor vehicle so as to restore such vehicle to its appearance as originally manufactured.”

Similar bills have been previously proposed, without success.  Supporters of such reform argue that such legislation will lower cost for automobile repairs.  Not surprisingly, the insurance industry endorses such efforts.  Opponents of such bills point to the cost of developing quality parts, well designed to safely function as needed and to appeal to consumers at the same time.  The opponents believe that allowing anyone to knock off these parts would not help the auto industry in this country.

Apple v. Samsung: Summary Update - January 2012

Engadget has started a "Follow the Saga" feature concerning the ongoing Apple v. Samsung feud, including the most recent announcement that the ban on the original Galaxy Tab 10.1 has been upheld in Germany.  The "Follow the Saga" coverage at Engadget also includes Samsung's 3G lawsuits.

Of note, Apple filed another suit against Samsung in Germany on January 17, 2012, asserting Registered Community Design Nos. 000748280-0006 and 000888920-0018 against 15 Samsung phones between the two designs, as reported by FOSS Patents.  There is an invalidity proceeding pending in both, each initiated by Samsung on August 9, 2011.

Registered Community Design No. 000748280-0006

Registered Community Design No. 000888920-0018

Nike Accused of Infringing Golf Club Design Patents

The Irrevocable Trust of Anthony J. Antonious sued Nike for infringement of U.S. Patent Numbers D481,090 and D481,091, issued in October 2003, each covering a “Metalwood type golf club head.” The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court of New Jersey, seeks actual damages, treble damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

The Trust alleges that Nike sold infringing golf clubs under the SQ Sumo and SQ Sasquatch names from 2008-2010.

Left:  Fig. 2 of U.S. Patent No. D D481,090, showing a bottom, perspective view of the driver; Right:  Nike SasQuatch SUMO SQ driver