Design Patent Roundup

After a short hiatus, we are back with this week’s design patent roundup. In honor of this springtime weather here in Boston, we begin the roundup with a case about swimming pool chairs. As always, we will keep you posted of any interesting developments in these cases.

David Sutherland, Inc. v. Teak Warehouse, Inc. et al, No. 3:13-cv-00937 (S.D. Ca. April 18, 2013)

Last Thursday, David Sutherland, Inc. filed a design patent infringement case in the Southern District of California against Teak Warehouse, Inc, accusing Teak of infringing its U.S. Design Patent No. 490,995, for a “Pool Chair.”  A figure of the ‘995 Patent is shown below alongside an image of the accused Teak chair.  The case has been assigned to District Judge Larry Alan Burns.  Sutherland is being represented by Latham & Watkins.  Teak has not yet entered an appearance.

Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc. v. BH North Am. Corp., No. 2:13-cv-02904 (C.D. Ca. April 24, 2013)

On Wednesday, Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc. filed a design patent infringement case in the Central District of California against BH North America Corporation (“BHNA”), accusing BHNA of infringing several of its utility patents, and two of its U.S. Design Patents for a “Stationary Exercise Bicycle.” The Design Patents-in-Suit are U.S. Design Patent No. 473,274 and 473,602. Below is a figure from the ‘602 Patent alongside an image of BHNA’s ION Fitness Countdown Indoor Training Bike. The case has been assigned to District Judge Michael Fitzgerald. Mad Dogg is represented by Maceiko IP. BHNA has not yet entered an appearance.

Centria. v. Merchant & Evans, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-00585 (W.D.Pa. April 23, 2013)

On Tuesday, Centria filed a design patent infringement complaint in the Western District of Pennsylvania against Merchant & Evans, Inc. (“M&E”), accusing M&E of infringing Centria’s U.S. Design Patent No. 527,834 for a “Building Panel.” A little known fact about design patents is that building materials are firmly within the scope of design patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 171. Below is a figure from the ‘834 Patent alongside an image of M&E’s EX161 panel. Notably, the profile lines for M&E’s EX161 appear to be somewhat different. . The case has been assigned to Judge Nora Barry Fischer. Centria is represented by The Webb Law Firm. M&E has not yet entered an appearance.